We use analytics tools to understand how people use the site. They're optional: if you decline, the site works the same, no analytics cookies are set and Google gets only a cookieless, anonymous count signal. Your votes are saved either way; the details are in the privacy policy.
01The House met at 10 a.m. and was called to order by the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. Fine).
02Designation of Speaker Pro Tempore
04After Recess
06Designation of Christian Schrank as Acting Inspector General of the Federal Housing Finance Agency: Message From the President of the United States (H. Doc. No. 119-114)
23 public bills, H.R. 6347- 6369; and 3 resolutions, H. Res. 919-921, were introduced.
Pages H4993-94
Reports Filed
There were no reports filed today. Speaker: Read a letter from the Speaker wherein he appointed Representative Fine to act as Speaker pro tempore for today.
Page H4969
Recess
The House recessed at 11:03 a.m. and reconvened at 12 p.m.
Page H4976
Recess
The House recessed at 1:23 p.m. and reconvened at 1:30 p.m.
Page H4985
Small Business Regulatory Reduction Act of 2025
The House considered H.R. 2965, to require the Administrator of the Small Business Administration to ensure that the small business regulatory budget for a small business concern in a fiscal year is not greater than zero. Consideration is expected to resume tomorrow, December 3rd.
Pages H4987-89
Pursuant to the Rule, the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Small Business now printed in the bill shall be considered as adopted.
Page H4987
H. Res. 916, the rule providing for consideration of the bills (H.R. 4312), (H.R. 1005), (H.R. 1049), (H.R. 1069), (H.R. 2965) and (H.R. 4305), was agreed to by a recorded vote of 210 ayes to 209 noes, Roll No. 309, after the previous question was ordered by a yea-and-nay vote of 210 yeas to 205 nays, Roll No. 308.
Pages H4978-87
Destroying Unnecessary, Misaligned, and Prohibitive Red Tape Act
The House considered H.R. 4305, to direct the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration to establish a Red Tape Hotline to receive notifications of burdensome agency rules. Consideration is expected to resume tomorrow, December 3rd.
Pages H4989-92
Pursuant to the Rule, the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Small Business now printed in the bill shall be considered as adopted.
Pages H4989-90
H. Res. 916, the rule providing for consideration of the bills (H.R. 4312), (H.R. 1005), (H.R. 1049), (H.R. 1069), (H.R. 2965) and (H.R. 4305), was agreed to by a recorded vote of 210 ayes to 209 noes, Roll No. 309, after the previous question was ordered by a yea-and-nay vote of 210 yeas to 205 nays, Roll No. 308.
Pages H4978-87
Discharge Petition
Representative Luna presented to the clerk a motion to discharge the Committee on Rules from the consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 725) entitled, a resolution providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 1908) to prohibit stock trading and ownership by Members of Congress and their spouses and dependent children (Discharge Petition No. 11). Presidential Message: Read a message from the President transmitting a notification to Congress that he intended to designate Christian Schrank (Deputy Inspector General for Investigations, Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General) as Acting Inspector General of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, in place of the current Acting Inspector General, James Lisle, effective no later than 30 days from delivery of this message-referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and ordered to be printed (H. Doc. 119- 114).
Page H4978
Quorum Calls: Votes
One yea-and-nay vote and one recorded vote developed during the proceedings of today and appear on pages H4986 and H4986-87. Adjournment: The House met at 10 a.m. and adjourned at 3:51 p.m.
Every speech and line is the Congressional Record's own text, read from GovInfo. Speakers are matched to members by GPO's own metadata. Referandom places each turn on the Clerk's video by matching its words: 101 of 125 spoken turns were found. Turns without a time are still listed; they just can't seek.
Morning-Hour Debate
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of January 3, 2025, the Chair will now recognize Members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning-hour debate.
The Chair will alternate recognition between the parties, with time equally allocated between the parties and each Member other than the majority and minority leaders and the minority whip limited to 5 minutes, but in no event shall debate continue beyond 11:50 a.m.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Gary Steinhardt from Lafayette, Indiana.
Gary Steinhardt served in the U.S. Army for 30 years and is a veteran of the Vietnam and Iraq wars.
Gary has also served as a professor of agronomy at Purdue University, focusing on soil conservation and the preservation of agricultural land. He has been with Purdue for nearly 50 years.
Gary has been a great advocate for veterans in Tippecanoe County for years. Gary has served in multiple positions within the VFW and the American Legion, such as post chaplain and commander of post 38. He has also been very active with other Vietnam veterans' organizations in the area, furthering legislation affecting veterans' issues.
Gary was recently diagnosed with a life-limiting illness. My thoughts and prayers go out to Gary and his family during this time, and I thank him for his many years of selfless service to our country, our veterans, and Purdue University.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Martinsville Police Chief Rick Lang, who is retiring from the Martinsville Police Department this month after over 50 years in law enforcement.
He first became a law enforcement officer in 1974 and has spent most of his life faithfully serving the people of Morgan County with unwavering dedication.
Rick Lang first served as the Martinsville police chief from 2015 to 2016 and took over for a second time as chief that year. Prior to serving as police chief, Rick Lang served as a Morgan County-based detective with the Indiana State Police.
I thank Rick for his dedicated years of selfless service to our Martinsville and Morgan County communities, and I wish him the best in his well-deserved retirement as he begins this exciting new chapter in his life.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to congratulate back-to-back Indiana High School Athletic Association's 6A State champion football team of Brownsburg Bulldogs.
The Brownsburg Bulldogs faced Westfield High School once again in the State finals at Lucas Oil Stadium. Brownsburg successfully defended its title as the reigning State football champion, defeating Westfield with a final score of 38-31. The Brownsburg football team finishes their remarkable season undefeated with a record of 14-0.
I congratulate these outstanding student athletes on winning back-to- back State championships. Every one of these students should be incredibly proud of their hard work, dedication, and commitment to excellence.
I also thank the parents, the coaches, and the faculty, who gave their time and efforts for this team. They couldn't have won without their support.
Once again, I congratulate the reigning State 6A football champions, the Brownsburg Bulldogs.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to congratulate the South Putnam High School football team on winning the IHSAA 1A State championship this year. The South Putnam Eagles took on Pioneer. After a back-and-forth battle in the first half, the South Putnam Eagles took on a commanding lead, achieved a decisive victory, and won with a final score of 55-29 against Pioneer. This historic victory is South Putnam's first State football championship since 1986.
This State championship win is a testament to the South Putnam student athletes' dedication, teamwork, and perseverance. They should be incredibly proud of their hard work.
I thank the parents, teachers, and Coach Chuck Sorrell for their support and efforts that helped this team succeed on and off of the field.
Again, I congratulate the South Putnam Eagles on their State championship.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today because Donald Trump and congressional Republicans are, once again, waging war on our healthcare system.
Their big, ugly bill restricts access to Federal student loans for advanced degrees, including in high-demand healthcare sectors like nursing, physical and occupational therapy, social work, and so many more.
When I went to school to become an occupational therapist, I had to take out loans. I remember filling out those forms, hoping that I would have enough to cover tuition, books, and other expenses. The weight of those payments followed me for years.
I took on that debt because I wanted to build a better future for my family and because I wanted to help people as a healthcare practitioner.
This administration wants to force aspiring healthcare professionals to mortgage their futures before they treat their first patient. Worse, this move will deter them from answering their calling, taking an ax to the very system that trains them.
Due to the Republican healthcare crisis, our hospitals are understaffed, clinics are closing, and rural communities are being left behind. Our nurses are burning out. Therapists are stretched thin, and practitioners are retiring faster than we can replace them. Every healthcare system in America is screaming code blue, warning us that the future of our workforce is flatlining before our very eyes.
This means fewer nurses at the bedside, fewer therapists helping patients recover, fewer specialists serving rural communities, and fewer mental health providers at a time when this Nation is desperate for them. It means Americans are waiting longer for care as hospitals operate with skeleton staffing.
It means communities are growing sicker all because this Congress, under Republican control, decided that access to advanced healthcare education is a privilege for the few rather than a pathway to service for all. This is a callous assault on the very people who hold this Nation together: every prospective student who dreams of helping people in healthcare.
This misguided policy, which caps graduate student loan borrowing for certain advanced health degrees, means that these students will be permitted to borrow only half as much in Federal loans compared to their counterparts.
Not only will healthcare professionals be impacted but teachers, architects, accountants, engineers, and many other professionals who will lose the ability to finance their education through reliable, flexible Federal loans, pushing them instead into the arms of predatory private lenders and adding to the mountain of debt that our students already endure.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics says that we need to fill nearly 200,000 nursing positions every year through 2033 just to keep pace. The United States also needs tens of thousands of new mental health professionals and rehabilitation providers annually. Cutting off our healthcare system's talent pipeline also is not just cruel, but it is shortsighted and will drive up the cost of healthcare. It is reckless, and it further strains a healthcare system already in crisis.
Gutting the healthcare workforce will shrink the care economy, and it will stifle job growth at a time when families are desperate for getting control of their lives and ensuring that they can afford their daily cost of living.
Under this thoughtless Republican rule, if you want to save lives, prepare to drown in debt. If you want to do a job that this Nation needs, prepare to pay a steep price for it. If you want to look after the sick, don't expect your government to look after you.
In the richest country in the world, Trump and congressional Republicans are saddling an already overburdened healthcare workforce with an even more unimaginable financial burden, but the American people know better. They remember the nurse who sat with their parents in hospice, the physical therapist who got them back on their feet, and the social worker who helped their family get the support that they needed.
They know that healthcare workers aren't to be taken for granted or pushed aside, and they know that Donald Trump and congressional Republicans have failed them once again.
As the only occupational therapist in Congress, I will not sit idly by while Trump and congressional Republicans sabotage the very workforce that keeps this Nation alive. House Democrats will continue to fight like hell to protect every student, every patient, and every community that Washington Republicans are abandoning.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the outstanding work of Ron Hauenstein, who has served as the executive director of the Spokane Fatherhood Initiative since 2018.
Throughout my time representing eastern Washington in Congress, I have seen firsthand the transformative impact that this organization has had under Ron's leadership. The Fatherhood Initiative has become a pillar in our community, equipping fathers with values like commitment, resilience, gratitude, and honor.
Their guiding principle and their guiding belief is simple but powerful: When fathers are present and engaged, children do better and entire communities prosper. Time and again, families across Spokane have been reunited, and lives have been changed for the better, one dad, one child, and one family at a time.
Earlier this month, my team had the honor of joining the Spokane Fatherhood Initiative's Building Legacy gala, where our community rallied to raise nearly $175,000 for life-changing programs.
With weekly classes, some lasting half a year, and special outreach to men reentering society after incarceration or dealing with drug addiction, Spokane Fatherhood Initiative is helping dads restore relationships with their children and strengthen the fabric of our region.
I express my gratitude and extend my congratulations to Ron Hauenstein and everyone at the Spokane Fatherhood Initiative. Their dedication to building stronger fathers is building a stronger Spokane and a brighter community for every child in our community.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Scouts Across America. Scouts Across America carries forward with a remarkable legacy that began with Robert Baden-Powell, a British Army officer whose simple idea was that outdoor skills, teamwork, and service could build better citizens and a better world.
Robert Baden-Powell served with the British military in Afghanistan and against the Boer in South Africa, and the ideas that he saw there and the skills that he saw that were needed to be developed in young boys. From that, grew a global movement and in our country inspired what is now Scouting America, chartered by Congress to serve our Nation's youth by instilling the values of the Scout oath and law.
As a proud Scout dad, I rise today to say very clearly: Scouts is an outstanding program, and America needs more Scouts, not less.
It takes real effort from moms and dads and volunteers to get kids to meetings, campouts, and service projects. That effort pays off in character, confidence, civic service, and self-reliance of our young people.
Eleanor and I are father and mother to three boys and two girls, and we look forward to hopefully one day being the proud parents of five Eagle Scouts.
Today, Mr. Speaker, let's honor the Scouts, the volunteer leaders, the parents, and the enduring legacy of Robert Baden-Powell, whose vision still calls each new generation to duty, service, and leadership.
May we always support this movement so that more young Americans, especially the young people of eastern Washington, can discover a lifetime of impact and purpose, guided by the Scout oath and the Scout law.
Mr. Speaker, today, I rise to recognize two Thanksgiving food drives held in my district last week.
First, Santa Ana's Nicholas Academic Centers hosted a food drive for students and their families to pick up groceries and Thanksgiving meals to enjoy during the holidays.
The second is, in Anaheim, the YMCA joined forces with the legendary Frank Garcia to host the annual We Give Thanks food drive.
Thanks to hundreds of volunteers and donations, thousands of Orange County families had a Thanksgiving dinner with their families.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the Anaheim High School girls' flag football championship win.
Earlier this month, the Anaheim girls' flag football team brought home their first-ever division championship. Thanks to their strong defense, aggressive offense, and dedicated coaching staff, the Colonists again earned a well-fought victory.
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate Anaheim, which has again made us proud.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life, legacy, and memory of Anaheim's true son, Gilbert Avina.
A graduate of Anaheim High School, he went on to dedicate 32 years of service to the city of Anaheim. Gilbert also served as the president of the Anaheim Car Club, where he gave back to the community that meant so much to him.
Above all, Gilbert's heart belonged to his family. Married to his beloved wife, Teresa, he was a father, stepfather, and proud grandfather. His kindness, strength, humor, and work ethic touched all of us.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my deep concerns over how healthcare costs are rising in our communities and how they are impacting our communities back home.
Today, I want to share the story of Sonia. Sonia is an elderly and disabled individual who relies on disability retirement and Social Security to get by.
Today, she can't afford a full-time caregiver, so her son is taking over to take care of her on a full-time basis. I have to ask, how long can her son take care of Sonia? Is this how we are meant to take care of our seniors in this country?
Sonia's story is not unique. Without renewing the Affordable Care Act tax credits, millions of Americans could face the same situation that Sonia is facing today.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize an extraordinary group of young athletes from Virginia's Sixth Congressional District, the Parry McCluer High School boys' cross-country team, who have achieved a rare and remarkable feat. This season, the Fighting Blues captured their third consecutive VHSL State championship, securing titles in 2023, 2024, and now 2025.
At this year's State meet, the team delivered a dominant performance. Kebryl Chandler claimed the individual State title, finishing first overall. He was followed by outstanding efforts from Caleb Cooper, who placed sixth; Josh Cooper, eighth; Logan Wheelock, ninth; and Hinckley Lovelace, who finished 12th. Their combined strength, discipline, and endurance propelled Parry McCluer to another well-earned championship. They were joined by their teammates, Sebastian George and Sam Carpenter, who helped make the team a success throughout the season.
This exceptional program thrives under the leadership of coaches Chris Poluikis and Jacob Zimmerman, whose guidance, training, and belief in these athletes have built a true championship tradition.
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate each runner, their coaches, their families, and the entire Parry McCluer community. Their three-peat victory is a testament to perseverance, teamwork, and excellence, and it continues to make the city of Buena Vista, the Sixth Congressional District, and the entire Commonwealth of Virginia proud.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize an exceptional group of young athletes from Virginia's Sixth Congressional District, the Broadway High School girls' softball team, who captured their school's first-ever VHSL Class 3 State championship.
The Gobblers completed a remarkable 23-4 season, earning Valley District, Region C, and State titles. Their dominant run included two perfect games and 12 shutouts, and they outscored opponents 216-48 along the way.
This championship was made possible by the outstanding efforts of the team's players: Cathryn Caffrey, Lilah Deavers, April Gingerich, Annaleah Grither, Sarah Grither, Kaleigh Harper, Courtney Hensley, Savannah Janzen, Alexia Lambert, Emma Morris, Ashlyn Spitzer, Brooklyn Spitzer, Hannah Tinnell, and Madalyn Wolfe.
Their success was guided by Head Coach Becky Cantrell and Assistant Coaches Daren Lam, John Jenkel, Emma Earhart, Morgan Landes, and Aleisha Lambert.
Special commendation goes to pitcher Lilah Deavers, a Division I commit and first-team all-State, and to catcher Madalyn Wolfe, also first-team, All-State, whose leadership anchored the team throughout the season.
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate these great athletes, their coaches, and the entire Broadway community on a historic and inspiring championship year.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to condemn in the strongest possible terms the illegal and unconstitutional dismantling of the Department of Education by the Trump administration.
Congress created the Department of Education. Only an act of Congress could eliminate it. The administration knows this, so they are trying to circumvent the separation of powers by chipping away at the Department until it is gone. What a sad and terrible message that sends to the country and the world.
The administration's latest attack on the Department of Education is with six interagency agreements that will move critical programs and services out of the Department of Education to other agencies without the needed expertise, funding, or staff.
The programs this administration illegally reassigned to other departments include Title I, which provides funding for schools with high populations of low-income students; the McKinney-Vento grant program for youth experiencing homelessness; grant programs for English learners, rural schools, literary initiatives; and more.
Programs like TRIO and GEAR UP help underserved students access and succeed in higher education, and they moved those, too. They moved programs that support HBCUs and other minority-serving institutions.
These are statutory responsibilities that Congress directed the Department
These actions will make it more difficult for local schools to get the funding they need. Now, they will have to navigate multiple Federal agencies instead of one. It is inefficient, unnecessary, and unpopular.
Poll after poll shows that the majority of parents support the Department of Education, and that is especially true with parents of students with disabilities. These parents know what is at stake if schools lose the Federal resources they rely on to educate every student, no matter their background or ability.
Unfortunately, the Trump administration has endangered these resources by intentionally burying them behind additional layers of red tape and bureaucracy.
There is a lot we could be doing to improve public education. To prepare future students, they need a well-rounded education that inspires critical thinking, confidence, communication, creativity, and a love of learning. Students need arts and music education, hands-on project-based lessons that teach teamwork, and a wide range of career and technical education classes. We must invest in, not cut, educational research, and we need to promote, rather than politicize, family, parental, and community engagement.
To fully learn and thrive, students need to have enough food to eat, and they deserve the best physical infrastructure in which to learn. They need access to behavioral healthcare, and they need to be safe and feel safe.
Unfortunately, right now, many students across the country are terrified to go to school because ICE is in their community. In Oregon, ICE agents are stalking school parking lots and school routes and detaining parents in front of their children. In one instance, ICE agents surrounded two high school students at a coffee shop and pointed rifles at them. This is beyond unacceptable.
Students as young as 9 years old know these actions are wrong. A fourth grade student gave me a handwritten letter, saying she is worried that ICE will take her friends away and that her friends will go home and their parents won't be there because they got deported. How is a student supposed to focus on learning if they are afraid that armed, masked agents are going to take their family and friends? These are children.
Unfortunately, House Republicans are taking their cues from Donald Trump, Stephen Miller, and others who do not grasp the damage they are causing to children as they try to close the Department of Education and slash education funding, food assistance, and health insurance but somehow manage to find and give $170 billion to the Department of Homeland Security to carry out an inhumane mass deportation agenda. It is tragic, and it is pathetic.
This administration has declared war on public education, but we are not backing down. We will not stop fighting against the dismantling of the Department of Education and the weaponization of immigration enforcement.
House Democrats understand how much better our country would be if we had a mass education plan instead of a mass deportation plan.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today with a heavy heart. Last Wednesday, the Nation witnessed a heartbreaking and senseless act of violence involving two members of our National Guard from West Virginia, Specialist Sarah Beckstrom and Staff Sergeant Andrew Wolfe.
Specialist Beckstrom gave her life in service to our country. She wore our Nation's uniform with honor, stood ready to defend her neighbors, and lived out the highest ideals of duty and sacrifice. We grieve her loss deeply, and I ask God to bring comfort and peace to her family, her loved ones, and entire National Guard community.
We also pray for the full and swift recovery of Staff Sergeant Wolfe. He remains in critical condition, and Americans across Kansas and the country continue to cover him in prayer. I ask for God's healing hand on him, for strength for his family, and for protection over every man and woman who serves.
Mr. Speaker, tragedies like this remind us that the cost of our freedom is not free. None of these men and women were drafted or forced to put on the uniform they wear. They boldly answered the call to serve in defense of our freedom and safety, and we are eternally grateful for the sacrifice that they and all the Armed Forces make every day in service to our country.
Tragedies like this shake us, but they also remind us just how precious life is, how quickly it can be taken, and how much we owe to those who step forward to serve.
This violence was senseless. It was wrong. Today, we pause not to debate, but to mourn, to honor, and to pray.
Mr. Speaker, let us remember Sarah Beckstrom's courage. Let us stand with Andrew Wolfe as he fights to recover. Let us hold their families close in our hearts during these difficult days ahead.
May God bless the Beckstrom and Wolfe families. May He watch over our National Guard, and may He bring comfort and healing to all who are hurting.
Mr. Speaker, may Specialist Sarah Beckstrom's soul rest in peace.
Mr. Speaker, every year, small businesses spend nearly $15,000 per employee to comply with Federal laws. American companies spend over $3 trillion a year on compliance.
I am sure this is not a shock to anyone in this Chamber, but we know that some of that cost gets passed on to consumers. The Competitive Enterprise Institute estimates that U.S. households absorb $16,000 annually in hidden regulatory fees and taxes.
For many families in the Big First District of Kansas, that money could be used much better elsewhere.
When this Republican majority was elected last year, the country trusted us to roll back burdensome regulations and lower costs. This week, we have an opportunity to do so.
The small businesses that make up the Big First are often small, family-owned and -operated mom-and-pop shops. They don't manage or run their small businesses to be billionaires or to become ultrawealthy. Their goals are to serve their communities, meet a need, and serve their neighbors well. That is what they should be empowered to do, but sadly, that is not their reality.
Everyday Americans are forced to bear the brunt of that regulatory cost. If you talk to families across my district and ask them what they could do with $16,000, the answers would be endless. Some may say that they would purchase a car for their family or teenage child.
Many would love to see that money stored away in an emergency fund or a retirement fund. If their family has a loved one who is aging or facing health challenges, that money could be used to assist with caregiving or medical expenses. No matter the response, I feel confident that the vast majority of Kansans would agree that they could find a better use for those dollars than paying an additional tax to bureaucrats who want to regulate every detail of how they do business from hundreds of miles away.
This week, House Republicans will take a commonsense step forward by protecting consumers and small businesses alike from these costs. The Small Business Regulatory Reduction Act is exactly the type of legislation that this Congress was elected to enact. It ensures that any regulatory change from the SBA does not increase compliance costs for small businesses and, in turn, consumers. Regulations are meant to protect competition, not make costs unbearable for businessowners and consumers.
We are working to right that wrong, make small businesses stronger, and give American families more breathing room in their day-to-day expenses. Despite the distraction that the media and some of my colleagues across the aisle would love to see in this Chamber, this majority is still laser-focused on delivering on our promises that we made to the country last year. This is yet another small step forward to getting our country back on track and
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the South El Monte High School Lady Eagles volleyball team on their first-ever CIF Southern Section Division 9 championship.
In a hard-fought match, the Lady Eagles fell behind two sets to one before rallying back with determination and grit to take the lead. They forced a decisive fifth set, battling point-for-point until the score was tied 12-12. Senior Zaira Garcia then delivered back-to-back kills, sealing the championship for South El Monte.
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the Lady Eagles volleyball team on this historic achievement.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the amazing victory of the South El Monte High School Eagles football team in the 2025 CIF Division 14 championship game. The team claimed the school's first-ever championship in a nail-biting 14-6 win.
Under the leadership of their head coach, Frank Gallardo, the team devoted countless hours to training this season. Their hard work and competitive spirit carried them forward when the game was tied at six.
In the final minutes, Eagles quarterback Michael Maldonado stepped up under pressure and delivered a perfect 10-yard touchdown strike to Gabriel Canchola. This touchdown pass put the Eagles in the lead.
With 21 seconds still left, the Eagles' Ivan Lopez broke through the line to sack the opponent's quarterback and seal the championship.
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the Eagles football team for their first championship. Their hard work and teamwork shined through, and myself and our community are very proud of them.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the inspiring 2025 football season of the Baldwin Park Braves.
After enduring a five-game losing streak, the Braves turned their season around with determination and teamwork and ultimately secured an at-large bid into Division 11 playoffs.
In the playoffs, the Braves became a different team and dominated their way to the CIF Division 11 championship game.
This was the first CIF Southern Section championship appearance for Baldwin Park since 1991. Unfortunately for the Braves, the goal of a championship would end when their opponent kicked the game-winning field goal with 8 seconds left on the clock.
Although they did not take home the title, their teamwork and determination reflected the true spirit of a champion and serves as an inspiration to all of us.
Mr. Speaker, I applaud the Baldwin Park Braves football team on their success this season. Their perseverance and commitment have made their community incredibly proud.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to celebrate the 20th anniversary of New Life Centers, an organization that I am proud to represent in my district.
Led by Pastor Matt DeMateo, New Life Centers started as a small group working on community violence intervention programs and is now a citywide movement providing our youth with mentoring, education, sports, play, summer day camps, after-school, and peacemaking programs.
Its community-based, hands-on approach has played a key role in driving down gun violence in our neighborhood of Little Village. New Life Centers Community Care programs also serve more than 45,000 individuals in need of housing, food, and other necessities. Its Pan de Vida Fresh Market distributes food to more than 35,000 individuals per year, filling the gaps that the funding cuts to Federal nutrition programs have created.
When Operation Midway Blitz brought chaos and pain to our community, Pastor Matt and New Life Centers responded by supporting immigrant families, taking food to their homes, and helping find loved ones that ICE had taken.
Mr. Speaker, the work of New Life Centers helps strengthen our community through faith, hope, and healing. I look forward to many more years of partnerships to change the lives and change neighborhoods.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today with great pride to celebrate the 100th anniversary of Otis P. Graves Elementary School in my district.
Its dual language model develops bilingual and biliterate students that can succeed and be proficient in English and Spanish, opening future opportunities in an increasingly global society.
Even through the challenging moments our community has faced this year, this school has remained a safe and welcoming place for all kids and has promoted and instilled a love of learning. No matter what may be happening at home or in the world, these kids know that they can come here to learn and feel supported.
Mr. Speaker, I am honored to represent them in Congress, and I applaud the teachers, staff, administrators, and families that have helped build this milestone.
Congratulations to Otis P. Graves, and here is to 100 more years.
Mr. Speaker, as the year comes to an end, I join Leyden Township in Cook County, Illinois, in celebration of the 175th anniversary of its establishment.
In addition to the unincorporated areas, the Leyden Township borders include part of Rosemont, Schiller Park, Franklin Park, part of Northlake, River Grove, Elmwood Park, parts of Melrose Park, Park Ridge, the most western part of Norridge and Bensenville, east of County Line Road.
Leyden Township is a place where neighbors care about each other and love spending time getting to know each other. You just have to attend one of their bingo nights to understand what I mean.
With more than 93,000 residents, Leyden Township takes care of their people. They have a pantry for those in need, a township handyman that provides free services for seniors, and a recreation department dedicated to building a stronger community through educational and recreational programming.
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate Leyden Township on its first 175 years.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate something that began in the heart of my hometown, New Haven, Connecticut. A city known not only for its world-class pizza but for its big heart, its creativity, and the way our people lift one another up when times get tough.
About a year ago, I stood here on this very floor and proclaimed New Haven the pizza capital of the United States. Since that declaration, something remarkable has happened not just to our pizza scene but to the spirit of Connecticut itself.
We have witnessed an explosion of creativity led by local artist Michael Pollack, whose New Haven Pizza Club project turned our city's love of pizza into art and art into impact. At the same time, under the leadership of Connecticut's chief marketing officer Anthony Anthony, the State of Connecticut launched the Connecticut Pizza Trail, a campaign that captured imaginations nationwide.
Those efforts drew over 15 billion media impressions and helped make New Haven one of the top 10 most searched destinations in the world, according to Skyscanner.
In New Haven, pizza capital means more than great crust and perfect char. It means community. It means sharing warmth, care, and connection around the table.
Out of that same spirit, the same sense of togetherness, came a remarkable idea: the Feeding Families Foundation.
Founded by Jeff and Samantha Dorman after their daughter was diagnosed with leukemia at just 2 years old, this Connecticut nonprofit was born out of lived experience.
During their long stays at Yale New Haven Children's Hospital, Jeff and Sam discovered something too many families learn the hard way: While hospitalized, children receive meals as part of their care. Their caregivers do not. The parents who never leave the bedside, who pour every ounce of strength into their child's recovery, are left to fend for themselves.
They decided to change that.
The idea was simple but profound: deliver free, nourishing meals directly to the hospital room so parents can stay where they belong by their child's side.
They built partnerships, raised funds, and launched what became the Parent Plate Program at Yale New Haven Children's Hospital.
Soon after, they met Michael Pollack, who turned his artistic energy toward this mission. Together, with a growing network of collaborators, they built bridges between hospitals and local restaurants, bringing comfort food from the community straight to the people who needed it the most, and wouldn't you know, it started with pizza.
Pollack introduced the Dormans to Billy Pustari, owner of Modern Apizza, voted the number one pizzeria in Connecticut by the people. Every Friday, Billy and his team make boxes of hot pies for the pediatric cancer floor at Yale. Those pizzas, those humble slices, bring comfort, warmth, normalcy, and a taste of home into the hardest days a family can face.
From there, other restaurants have joined in, lifting the mission even higher. Together, they have transformed our State's pizza pride into something much larger: a movement that feeds families when they need it the most.
Through these efforts, the Feeding Families Foundation has delivered thousands of meals to parents at both children's hospitals in Connecticut, Yale New Haven Children's Hospital, and Connecticut Children's Hospital. That small idea born in New Haven has now spread across the country.
Today, the foundation's programs are in six hospitals across five States providing tens of thousands of meals to parents and caregivers staying with their critically ill child in the hospital. They are just getting started as more and more children's hospitals across the country reach out to them.
The Dormans know firsthand what these families endure: the fear, the waiting, the prayers whispered over hospital beds. They know that a warm meal, even something as simple as New Haven apizza, can make a parent feel seen, cared for, and just a little less alone.
This is about more than pizza. It is about food insecurity in America, a problem that affects millions of families not just in hospitals but in every community of this Nation.
When a parent sits beside their sick child, hungry and exhausted, wondering if they can afford their next meal, it is not just a personal hardship. It is a moral issue.
The Feeding Families Foundation reminds us that food is love. It is dignity. It is what holds families together when everything else feels like it is falling apart, and this is what Connecticut does best.
We lead with compassion. We turn local pride into national purpose. We show that even something as simple as a pizza can spark a movement, one that feeds bodies, lift spirits, and strengthens communities from coast to coast.
Today, I invite my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to celebrate this homegrown idea and honor all those who have made the Feeding Families Foundation a symbol of what is best in America because what started in New Haven, Connecticut, is no longer just local. It is national. It is spreading one meal, one family, one hospital at a time. That is something worth believing in, something worth supporting, and something worth building upon together.
Mr. Speaker, in today's edition of Politico, there is a story about Nassau County Executive Bruce Blakeman setting up systems on the border between Nassau County and neighboring New York City, ostensibly to protect Nassau residents from the criminal element coming from their city neighbors.
That is one way for a suburb to act toward the city next door, although it may make it more difficult for the Long Island Mets fans to get to Citi Field or the Queens fans of the New York Islanders to get to UBS Arena. There is another way.
North of New York City, Westchester County and its border communities--Yonkers, Mt. Vernon, Pelham, and New Rochelle--work cooperatively and in harmony with the Bronx. New York City Bronx residents routinely visit New Roc City and Cross-County Shopping Center, and Westchester residents visit and work in Bay Plaza in the Bronx. The Woodlawn neighborhood, with associations and clubs, spans the line between the Bronx and Westchester. The Westchester Bee-Line public bus system takes passengers down to Fordham Road in the Bronx and back. The Montefiore Health System has hospitals in the Bronx and in Westchester and serves clients in between both.
State senators Jamaal Bailey and Nathalia Fernandez join me in representing both sides of the city/county border between the Bronx, New York City, and Westchester County. The brave men and women of the NYPD in the 45th and the 47th precincts work together cooperatively with police from Westchester County and its cities to deter and prevent crime and apprehend criminals when crimes do occur.
Bronx Borough President Vanessa Gibson and Westchester County Executive Ken Jenkins work together to advocate for the Penn Access project that benefits commuters from both counties. We don't need Big Brother intrusive facial recognition checkpoints. We have mutual respect and civic cooperation.
Bruce Blakeman, in his quest for higher office, thinks that turning us into fearful suburbs that resent their urban neighbors is a way to win votes. I grew up in Mt. Vernon in Westchester County a half a block from the border with the Bronx.
My whole life, not just my time in public service, has been about finding and working the common ground that unites us rather than feeding the anger and resentments that divide us. Politicians on the far fringes of each side desire divisions that they believe can lead to elective office, power, and status. It is a false and dangerous path.
The dotted line that divides the city from the suburb is man-made. What we do on the Westchester/Bronx border and at any border anywhere is work together, and that is the prototype for the America that surely needs unity.
Think about how much we are going to need that unity, all Americans working together, when we face the next existential threat to our freedom and democracy, as we did with Nazi Germany and militarized Japan. It is coming, and you know it.
In the Bronx and Westchester, we will be ready. We encourage the Bruce Blakemans of the world to stop pandering and start building the cooperation we will need in the days to come.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate North Carolina State University's new chancellor, Kevin Howell, who was recently installed as the university's 15th chancellor.
I have known Chancellor Howell for 30 years. He has served North Carolina State, the UNC system, and a former Governor at the highest levels.
Originally from Shelby, North Carolina, Howell graduated from NC State and was the first Black student body president during his senior year. He went on to earn his law degree from UNC Chapel Hill and served as a law clerk for the North Carolina Court of Appeals.
Howell was born and raised in North Carolina and spent many formative years at NC State, developing a deep appreciation and understanding of this thriving academic community.
In 2015, his NC State family even saved his life. Chancellor Howell's kidneys failed while he was working for
Chancellor Randy Woodson was an extraordinary leader who left his mark on the university forever. I have no doubt that Chancellor Howell will excel and continue leading NC State and its students, staff, and faculty to even higher heights.
Congratulations to Chancellor Howell. I look forward to our continued working relationship on behalf of NC State.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the extraordinary life of Reverend Janet Watrous, who sadly passed away in October.
Reverend Watrous was both a spiritual and social justice leader in our community for many years, and she was my neighbor.
She got her start in the ministry when she graduated from the Episcopal Divinity School in Cambridge, Massachusetts, in 1977. When the Episcopal Church officially allowed women into the priesthood, she became a priest, going on to serve as the first woman in parishes across the country, including New York, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and eventually North Carolina.
Janet was often called the Energizer Bunny by her colleagues because of her infectious attitude that made everyone around her want to work hard and do good. She led with love and light, whether it was through her diocesan work in North Carolina or serving as the president of Planned Parenthood.
Our community will always remember her spirit and the lives she changed for the better.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to give an ode, perhaps a eulogy, to the downfall of DOGE and to the people's movement that brought about its demise.
As we say good-bye to the departing, we take solace in knowing that our democracy endures in our people and our communities.
The centralized Department of Government Efficiency, imagined in the insane mind of Elon Musk and empowered by those around him, which wreaked havoc on the vital programs that sustain our communities appears to no longer exist.
In fact, the Director of OPM said just a couple of weeks ago: It doesn't exist. Even Musk himself downplayed his involvement this weekend, calling it merely a very interesting side quest. While the administration claims DOGE is now integrated into the agencies themselves, its existence as a formal priority appears to finally be dead.
Even in Congress, the future of the DOGE Subcommittee, created by once eager and enthusiastic GOP allies on the Oversight Committee, is uncertain. The explosive breakup of Musk and Trump just a few months ago, and now the sudden pending retirement of the subcommittee chairwoman over the Epstein files and GOP threats and lies, leave the DOGE congressional arm uncertain and rudderless, but perhaps with the opportunity to be repurposed.
Services for the departed will not be held. In lieu of flowers, please, America, continue to organize and fight for our democracy.
As we reflect on DOGE's short but destructive life, we remember how it laid waste to vital programs despite its lofty promises of cost- cutting and efficiency. Unfettered by the rule of law and driven by unchecked hubris, DOGE unleashed chaos, illegally dismantled agencies, conducted mass firings, canceled contracts, and mined the sensitive data of millions of American people.
The speed with which DOGE brought destruction to lifesaving agencies was matched only by the ferocity of the public outcry. Americans refused to sit idly by while children went hungry, while services for veterans, families, and elders were slashed without cause. In fact, in unison people across the political spectrum stood up to say: Hands off our data, hands off Social Security, and hands off the vital programs that keep our families alive in this country, and they showed Elon Musk the door.
Millions marched, attended townhalls, wrote letters, made calls, and demanded that Congress stop DOGE's disastrous work. When the hypocrisy of this so-called efficiency agency was exposed in the President's big, ugly bill, even Trump and Musk split up, and ultimately the Chairwoman herself announced her departure from this body in the wake of broken promises and threats by the administration.
The administration, while claiming to pursue savings, was cutting services for the most vulnerable not to reduce the debt, but ultimately, as has been shown, to fund tax breaks and giveaways to billionaires and those with the most.
Even in its final moments, DOGE found comfort in self-dealing and everyday grift. As it dismantled agencies and fired workers, it seized opportunities to privatize public assets and laid the groundwork for billions in private contracts and self-dealing for the ages.
Despite the Trump administration's claims that DOGE is still alive, and even its own X page dismissing the news as fake, we all know the truth: DOGE as the grifting scam it was imagined is dead, and its demise is a victory for the American people.
Not only is its formal office gone, but its downfall demonstrated the strength of our unity. Americans rejected DOGE because they recognize a dirty deal when they see one.
Now, let us be clear: We want to address the national debt, root out waste, fraud, and abuse, and build a government and programs that can serve everyone, but when the fraudsters themselves claim to have the fix, the American people see right through it.
Yet, DOGE's end does not mark the end of our work. We know that the time to organize is now, that we must stay focused and resist the barrage of distractions designed to sap our resolve, that we must continue to mobilize like our democracy depends on it because it does, and we must continue to do this work every single day.
This is not a time for despair. It is a time for action because the American people are strong. We are resilient, and we are ready for the fight ahead.
Madam Speaker, today I rise with profound pride and gratitude as we honor the bicentennial of my hometown, Akron, Ohio. For 200 years, Akron has stood as a place where ordinary people dare to do extraordinary things. It is a place shaped not only by industry or geography, but by courage, resiliency, and an unshakable belief in what a community can be.
Long before 1825, the land that would become Akron was home to native indigenous peoples who understood its beauty and its promise. Two centuries ago this week, Simon Perkins and Paul Williams laid out a new town on a watershed divide. They named it after the Greek word ``akros,'' which means summit or high point. In that single word, they captured both our geography and our destiny.
Akron quickly grew into a city of builders and innovators. It became known as the Rubber Capital of the World and served as the home of Goodyear, Firestone, and Goodrich. Workers in Akron shaped an industry that moved a nation forward. When those workers demanded dignity, fairness, and safety, Akron became the birthplace of the modern sit- down strike and a proving ground for the strength of solidarity.
It is also a city of justice seekers. John Brown once walked our streets and lived in a house on the same street where I grew up, a rabid abolitionist who ultimately died for the freedoms of enslaved people. Sojourner Truth delivered her famous ``Ain't I A Woman'' speech in Akron as well, spurring the foundation of understanding intersectionality. Generations of Akronites stood together to affirm that equality is not an aspiration, but it is a right, a right we continue to collectively fight for.
Akron is a city of world changers. It has given this country legendary athletes, such as LeBron James, Steph Curry, and Butch Reynolds, earning its title, ``The Birthplace of Champions.'' It has given us musicians who redefined genres, including Devo, The
The Birthplace of Champions isn't just a tagline or a motto, it is who we are. It is the people whose names you won't ever see in lights but built an industry, led innovation, and continued to fight for fairness and opportunity.
Perhaps Akron's greatest legacy is its people. Families come from every corner of the world to work hard, build homes, raise children, start businesses, and lift up one another. Akron is filled with people who don't quit when times are tough, and its residents understand that a community rises by lifting others.
Madam Speaker, as someone who grew up in Akron and was shaped by its values, I stand here because of that community.
Akron taught me compassion and resilience. It taught me that public service means fighting for working people, fairness, and opportunity. These are values that Akron has carried for two centuries, and I carry these same values with me in the Halls of Congress.
H. Res. 918 honors our past, but it also looks ahead to our future. Akron continues to lead in sustainable polymers, research, entrepreneurship, healthcare, the arts, and innovation. It continues to stand up to injustice. It continues to carry forward the spirit of the people who built this city.
Madam Speaker, I am deeply humbled to introduce H. Res. 918, celebrating 200 years of the city of Akron. I encourage its swift passage. May the next 200 years of the city of Akron be even brighter.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Dr. Wendy Wintersteen, president of Iowa State University, on her retirement next month after more than 40 years of distinguished service.
Dr. Wintersteen has been a remarkable leader whose commitment to her students and to the State of Iowa has left a lasting impact on the institution. She brought the ``Innovate at Iowa State'' vision to life, solidifying the school's role as a national leader in research and entrepreneurship.
Under her leadership, Iowa State University has advanced cutting-edge research to strengthen Iowa agriculture. She supported world-class faculty and helped prepare the next generation of leaders and innovators to solve challenges and better our State and our Nation.
My husband, Matt, an Iowa State alum, and I, of course, look forward to many more Cyclone games and know that Dr. Wintersteen will be cheering on the Clones for many more years to come.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Dr. Wintersteen and congratulate her on her retirement.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of Maureen Ann FitzSimons, born and raised in Larchmont, who passed away the day before Thanksgiving.
Maureen, a bright and engaging young woman, leaves behind her mother, two brothers, and adoring nieces and nephews after a 15-year battle with cancer that began at age 30.
Maureen attended Saints John and Paul School and the Ursuline School, continued on to earn her undergraduate degree from Georgetown University, and went on to earn her J.D. from St. John's Law School. During her school years, she was an athlete, as well, on the tennis and track teams.
Maureen's optimism and warmth shone through the many years, despite her health concerns. Whether at work or sailing at the Larchmont Yacht Club, she lived her life to the fullest as best she could.
Last night, her friends and family gathered to pay her final homage before today's funeral mass at St. Augustine's Roman Catholic Church in Larchmont.
Maureen deserved a better fate, a longer life, but she made her mark, nonetheless. Mr. Speaker, I salute that life and mourn her passing.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to applaud YouTube TV and Hulu + Live TV for expanding public access to Congress by carrying C-SPAN, C- SPAN2, and C-SPAN3 beginning next week.
For 46 years, C-SPAN's respected nonprofit service has offered Americans unfiltered, gavel-to-gavel coverage of their government in action. However, millions of streaming households were left without this vital window into the debates and decisions which shape our Nation.
By adding the C-SPAN networks, YouTube TV and Hulu + Live TV are making a strong and, I hope, enduring commitment to public service, transparency, and civic engagement. They now join cable and satellite providers like Comcast, Charter, Cox, DirecTV, and Dish in supporting a treasured service that strengthens accountability and confidence in our democratic systems.
This is a big win for the American people. Full access will help inform the public, no matter how they choose to watch.
Mr. Speaker, I thank YouTube TV and Hulu + Live TV for their important decision.
Mr. Speaker, we all mourn the loss from the tragic attack on two National Guard members here in Washington last week. Yet, once again, the master of distraction seeks to avoid any accountability for his role in this tragedy. Only 7 months earlier, the Trump administration granted asylum to the assassin.
Big unanswered questions for the President: What specific vetting was done with regard to the 3 years that this assassin lived here in America? Was his post-traumatic stress from his prior violent work considered? Was the caseworker who reported his possible radicalization interviewed and reviewed? Was his inability to even get a job a factor? Did this review include biometric information, checking social media platforms, and other steps?
Instead of blaming all immigrants and blaming Biden, how about just looking in the mirror and figuring out what went wrong here in this regime and how to fix it in order to avoid another tragedy? Americans deserve accountability and answers.
Mr. Speaker, today, I rise to recognize an extraordinary public servant from Jones County, Mr. Paul Sheffield, whose career reflects a lifetime of dedication to the safety and well-being of Mississippi families.
Paul began his public service in 1998 with the city of Laurel's traffic maintenance division. By 2001, he was serving as a police officer in the town of Sandersville and soon joined the Jones County Sheriff's Emergency Operation Center, working as a dispatcher, operations officer, reserve deputy, and canine deputy.
In 2005, Paul continued his calling at MEMA as an area coordinator, serving for 11 years in that role. During that time, he and his wife, Traci, whom he married in 1999, welcomed their son, Caleb, through adoption in 2010 and celebrated the birth of their daughter in 2013. His commitment to service grew right alongside his family.
After leaving MEMA in 2016, Paul served with the Emergency Management District of Forrest County. In 2018, he became the executive director of the Jones County Emergency Operations Center. He holds the distinction of Mississippi Certified Emergency Manager and has served as both vice president and president of the Mississippi Civil Defense Emergency Management Agency. Nationally, he is recognized as a certified emergency and disaster professional.
Mr. Sheffield's service also extends into the 911 Coordinators Association and 6 years with the Jones County Coroner's Office, where he continues to serve as deputy medical examiner.
Mr. Speaker, Mr. Sheffield's decades of leadership and dedication have strengthened emergency preparedness across our State. Today, I am proud to honor him and his lifetime of service.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak about rural America and the challenges it is facing.
People back home in eastern North Carolina are concerned about the lack of investment in rural communities, programs that are hard to access, high input costs, low return on their crops, and increasing debt just to keep the farm open.
That is why I am introducing two key bills to strengthen rural communities and family farms. The Rural Uplift and Revitalization Assistance Act will provide necessary technical assistance for rural communities to improve access to rural development programs.
The Farm Transitions Act of 2025 will reauthorize the Commission on Farm Transitions and require it to release a report with recommendations to help farms transition to the next generation.
These bills will make it easier to access rural development programs and for our next generation of farmers to keep our rich agricultural tradition alive.
Mr. Speaker, today, I rise to speak as a witness to the power of prayer.
Last week, my constituent, Andrew Wolfe, was attacked by an Islamic terrorist here in Washington, D.C. He is still fighting for his life.
I know Andrew's family. We have spoken many times. I will tell you, he is improving right now, but we need to continue to pray for him.
It is actually working. Prayer works. Behind the Speaker's rostrum here, it says very clearly: In God We Trust. Indeed we do and indeed we must trust in God and His saving power and continue to pray for Andy Wolfe.
He is currently able to move some of his fingers and hands and toes. He has not completely woken up yet, but I ask everyone across the aisle, across this entire building, and across this great country to please continue to pray for my constituent, Andy Wolfe.
Mr. Speaker, in the spirit of GivingTuesday, I rise to urge my colleagues to join me in supporting a measure at a time when our country needs it most. Whether giving in your time or treasure, today is the day when we give to those organizations across the country who help others all year long.
Ahead of Thanksgiving, I introduced the Food Bank Emergency Support Act, which will protect our Nation's food banks from future lapses in government funding like the recent government shutdown.
During the 43-day period, 42 million Americans struggled to put food on the table. These individuals were recipients of SNAP, our largest antihunger initiative.
When SNAP assistance is halted, the burden shifts to local food pantries funded by the Emergency Food Assistance program, or TEFAP, which typically provides one meal for every nine offered through SNAP.
My legislation would automatically double TEFAP funding during future funding lapses so food pantries can respond swiftly. This will supplement the giving that is given today and many days by nonprofits across the country so no one goes hungry. By setting politics aside, we can prioritize the health and well-being of all Americans and give back.
Mr. Speaker, today, I rise to recognize several North Canton first responders as Ohio's 13th Congressional District's champions of the week.
In the early hours of October 9, Sergeant Cody Dollinger, Officer Adam
In a remarkable act of bravery, Sergeant Dollinger and his team successfully rescued a wounded woman from the window of her apartment and brought her to the safety of medical professionals, all while the alleged assailant continued to fire shots from inside the apartment building.
In the end, without discharging their firearms, the Canton Regional SWAT Team successfully apprehended the suspected shooter.
Mr. Speaker, on October 9, before many of us had left the comfort of our homes or checked our emails or even had a cup of coffee, Sergeant Dollinger, Officer Knam, Officer Foltz, and firefighter-paramedic Bosler accomplished an incredible feat of bravery and heroism, reminding us how important they are for the safety and security of our communities.
Mr. Speaker, I, again, extend my sincere gratitude to Sergeant Dollinger and his entire team, as well as our North Canton and Canton First Responders who risk their lives every day to stop and battle evils only they can stop.
Providing for Consideration of H.R. 4312, Student Compensation and Opportunity Through Rights and Endorsements Act; Providing for Consideration of H.R. 1005, Combating the Lies of Authoritarians In...
Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
The Rules Committee met last night and reported out a rule providing for consideration of six measures: H.R. 4312, the SCORE Act; H.R. 1005, Combating the Lies of Authoritarians in School Systems Act; H.R. 1049, Transparency in Reporting of Adversarial Contributions to Education Act; H.R. 1069, the PROTECT Our Kids Act; H.R. 2965, Small Business Regulatory Reduction Act of 2025; and H.R. 4305, the DUMP Red Tape Act.
House Resolution 916 provides for consideration of H.R. 4312, the SCORE Act, under a closed rule. The rule provides 1 hour of general debate equally divided amongst and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Education and Workforce or their respective designees, and the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce or their respective designees and provides for one motion to recommit.
The rule further provides for consideration of H.R. 1005, Combating the Lies of Authoritarians in School Systems Act; H.R. 1049, Transparency in Reporting of Adversarial Contributions to Education Act; and H.R. 1069, the PROTECT Our Kids Act, all under closed rules with 1 hour of general debate each, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Education and Workforce or their respective designees, and provides each one a motion to recommit.
Finally, the rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2965, the Small Business Regulatory Reduction Act of 2025, and H.R. 4305, the DUMP Red Tape Act, both under closed rules with 1 hour of general debate each, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Small Business or their respective designees, and provides each one a motion to recommit.
This rule deals with several critical issues. There are three bills that all came out of the Education and Workforce Committee that would combat efforts by the Chinese Communist Party who meddle in our schools and universities. These bills include H.R. 1005, the Combating the Lies of Authoritarians in School Systems Act, led by Representative Joyce of Ohio. The bill prohibits public elementary and secondary schools from participating in financial contracts with the People's Republic of China. Additionally, H.R. 1005 requires school systems that receive sizable funds of $10,000 or more from foreign sources to disclose their agreements to the Department of Education.
Another bill being considered under this rule is H.R. 1069, the PROTECT Our Kids Act, led by Representative Hern from Oklahoma. Under H.R. 1069, Federal funding would be barred for elementary and secondary schools that have a partnership with a cultural or language institute funded by the Chinese Government, including a Confucius Institute. It would also bar any school that directly operates a learning center supported by the Chinese Government that receives support from an individual or entity acting on behalf of the Chinese Government.
On the outside, these seem like harmless educational organizations that seek to teach students Chinese language and culture. However, they are often used as tools by the CCP to steal American knowledge and/or indoctrinate children with anti-American ideas.
Lastly, H.R. 1049, the Transparency in Reporting of Adversarial Contributions to Education Act, led by Representative Bean from Florida, empowers parents by giving them the right to know when a foreign government or foreign entity of concern, particularly the Chinese Communist party funds, influences, or provides curriculum for American students in public schools.
Upon written request, a parent is entitled to review any curriculum that was purchased by foreign entities for their children's classroom.
While I think we can agree that it can be beneficial to broaden our children's horizons with new ideas from across global cultures, we must ensure it is done properly without undue foreign influence.
There are also two Small Business Committee bills being considered under this rule. H.R. 2965, the Small Business Regulatory Reduction Act, led by Representative Van Duyne from Texas, would ensure that any agency action taken by the Small Business Administration does not increase compliance costs on small businesses. The agency meant to be the promoter of small businesses shouldn't add to the already crushing regulatory burden facing these businesses.
H.R. 4305, the DUMP Red Tape Act, is led by Representative Wied from Wisconsin. This bill creates a dedicated hotline so small businesses can report to the Small Business Administration on any overly burdensome and costly regulations they must deal with. I think we can agree that we should do everything we can to help protect our small businesses in this country.
Finally in this rule, we also will be considering H.R. 4312, the SCORE Act, led by Representative Bilirakis from Florida and the chairmen of each subcommittee that has jurisdiction over this issue: Energy and Commerce Committee, Education and Workforce Committee, and the Judiciary Committee.
Mr. Speaker, this bill affirms the right of student-athletes to profit from their name, image, and likeness, or NIL. What the SCORE Act is trying to do is level the playing field for universities of all sizes and establish protections for student-athletes that all schools must abide by.
What we have gotten into is a race to the bottom with over 30 State laws and athletes jumping from team to team. The SCORE Act will make sure that universities that hit a certain threshold in athletics revenue are required to provide academic support, career counseling, and medical benefits.
As a longtime mediocre swimmer and a former swim coach, I am glad to see that the SCORE Act attempts to protect our Olympic sports. Under the bill, large universities must offer 14 to 16 different sports, which will ensure that non-revenue-producing sports are still supported. I personally hope this will include swimming, but the universities get to make that decision.
This bill would also protect athletes from unscrupulous agents. As I said before, the SCORE Act affirms the right of student athletes to make money by endorsing products and services. To protect the athlete, the SCORE Act caps agent fees at 5 percent of each contract's value.
The SCORE Act also allows for revenue sharing amongst student athletes. Under this bill, up to 22 percent of the average athletic revenue of the top 70 universities could be paid out to athletes by those universities.
The SCORE Act also requires NIL contracts to be examined to ensure that a contract is, in fact, payment for services rendered, as opposed to a payment to attend a certain institution. Without disclosure of NIL deals, there is a real possibility that the integrity
This bipartisan bill has received overwhelming support from schools and conferences across the country, including the NCAA. I believe this bill is the first step--not the last, the first step--in protecting college athletes and ensuring there is a national standard and an even playing field for universities across the country. Accordingly, I urge passage of this rule.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Griffith) for yielding me the customary 30 minutes.
Mr. Speaker, it is December 2. The year is almost over. We are now only a few weeks away from new health insurance premiums skyrocketing. People's insurance bills are going to double, triple, and, in some cases, quadruple. I would think all of us would be on the floor here today addressing that, right?
We would think that, but we would be wrong because we have on the floor this week another embarrassingly pointless and irrelevant collection of bills that does absolutely nothing to help everyday people.
When Democrats first raised the alarm about healthcare premiums skyrocketing earlier this year, Speaker Mike Johnson said: Oh, don't worry. This is a policy debate for December.
Here we are in December, and Republicans are doing nothing, zero. Actually, they are doing less than nothing. They took an 8-week vacation funded by the taxpayers, while people panicked about how they were going to afford their insurance premiums starting January 1. Families are going to see their bills go up and up, in some cases by nearly $1,000 more a month.
Maybe that doesn't sound like a lot of money to Republicans because these guys might not get how much that means to regular people. I know how out of touch they are. They are building a fancy new ballroom at the White House with their billionaire donors. That is where their attention is. They eat caviar and drink fine wine at Mar-a-Lago while regular people suffer.
Maybe they don't understand how much $1,000 a month is to the people I represent. Guess what. It is a lot. For most hardworking people, this is a catastrophic amount of money that suddenly needs to be added to a monthly budget. It is more than what a lot of people earn during a week of work.
Republicans have known that this crisis was coming for some time. Yet, they still have no plan on healthcare. They say they have one. Where the hell is it? We are still waiting. Their only answer so far is: Good luck, folks. Hope you like choosing between health insurance and food.
Here is the kicker, Mr. Speaker. If this House voted today to stop premiums from exploding, it would pass. It would pass easily. Democrats would vote for it, and I know there is a chunk of Republicans who would vote for it, as well. The Republican leadership will not bring it up because they care more about tax breaks for billionaires than tax credits for working families. It is that simple.
Don't even get me started about the bills Republicans are bringing to the floor this week. There are two bills for small businesses. That sounds good, right? Do my colleagues know what those bills do? One of them creates a hotline that already exists. Wow, that is groundbreaking. Neither of them does anything about the number one issue that I hear from small businesses, and that is tariffs.
Every small business owner I talk to says the same thing: The tariffs are killing them. The tariffs are making prices skyrocket. The tariffs are slowing down business.
These guys don't care. They don't care. They just go along to get along. They don't want to tick Trump off.
I guess my question is: If Republicans want to help small businesses, why are they blocking a vote to overturn the tariffs? Why have they refused to let Congress vote on the tariffs for months and months, even though it is our responsibility? What is up with that? After all, it is our responsibility. It is our job. Are they afraid that if it comes to the floor for a vote, they will lose?
Then we get a bunch of bills about protecting public schools. Give me a break. My sisters are public school teachers. I talk to parents and students all the time. What do they tell me? We need to reduce class size, support teachers, and make schools safer. We need to fund education.
These guys are bringing up a bill about foreign infiltration in third grade math class. Are my Republican colleagues kidding me? Is that a joke?
They are so concerned about China funding our schools. Well, here is a novel idea. Why don't we have America fund our schools? Why isn't funding our schools a bigger priority in this Congress? There is a crazy idea for my Republican friends. If they really care about public education, let's be the wind at the backs of our teachers and our schools.
Of course, they have a bill to help the NCAA take advantage of student athletes because what this Congress desperately needed was another billionaire organization empowered to squeeze young people. It is more of the same. It is more of the same.
They give more to those with the most, while taking away from those with the least. It is sick. It is sick. It is immoral. It represents the opposite of what I believe we are here to do, which is to help people, but that is their entire governing philosophy.
Republicans want to use their power to reward the billionaires and special interest donors. They want an economy where those at the top get showered in tax break after tax break, while working people get left further and further behind.
Mr. Speaker, it is shameful that this is what we are doing this week. It is shameful. It is outrageous, and it is wrong. I urge every Member of this body to vote ``no'' on this Republican rule.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, isn't it amazing that we come here to talk about these six bills and a significant portion of the debate from the other side of the aisle deals with bills that we are not addressing? They talk about some of those, and then they make allegations, Mr. Speaker, that are just not accurate.
I remember hearing the phrase just a second ago: Well, what are they doing to help small businesses? How soon we forget, Mr. Speaker, that just last summer we passed the working families tax cuts bill with lots of help for people on Main Street in Abingdon, Virginia, and Marion, Virginia.
In every small town that I represent in the Ninth Congressional District, those businesses are benefiting from what we did because we made major adjustments for taxes that would have burdened our small businesses and made it more expensive for them to compete against the big companies. Actually, what we did was we kept everything that we already had that was going to expire.
Now, it is true, the big companies get some of these tax cuts too. However, Mr. Speaker, the people who really need them are the small businesses. The people who need those breaks are the mom-and-pop shops. The people who need those breaks are people like my son, who is 18, and who is now getting tips. He is working tables at Mac and Bob's Restaurant, and he is getting tips.
Guess what, Mr. Speaker?
He won't have to pay income taxes on that. Now, maybe he is at a point where his money wouldn't be high enough that he would pay those taxes anyway, but for those families who rely on that tip money as a part of their income, that is a huge benefit to American families.
So I find it surprising that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle want to focus on saying that we are not helping small businesses when every single small business person in the United States knows that we have been fighting for them and knows that we have been helping them.
They know that these bills today in this rule--that is all we are doing, Mr. Speaker, is a rule on six bills--relate to small businesses and that what we are doing today will help a little bit.
They challenge us and ask: What are we doing to help small business? This is after we did a huge benefit on a number of different issues for small businesses, for mom-and-pops, and for people out there working.
Whether they are working overtime jobs where they are able to take a tax credit for that as well, whether they are doing tips, or whether they are just trying to buy some new equipment and want to be able to write that off in the first year instead of having to amortize it over a number of years--as used to be the law and it is what my colleagues on the other side advocated for last summer--they will start paying that again so that they can't take that write-off. That hurts small business.
So I ask you, Mr. Speaker, just to consider that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle really don't understand small business or they wouldn't make such a comment.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, let me just say that as the son of businessowners, I don't think the gentleman knows what he is talking about.
This is outrageous. I have the bills that we are considering here today, and the reason I am not spending much time talking about them is because they suck. They are awful. It is pathetic. One creates a hotline that already exists. Mr. Speaker, you can go online and call the hotline. They are just restating it. That is what we are doing here. There is nothing about the tariffs that are screwing over small businesses, nothing about the realities that small businesses are dealing with each and every day. My friends come up with these bills that are meaningless and that do nothing for anybody.
I am sorry that my Republican friends don't want to talk about the healthcare crisis. However, because of Republican inaction, millions and millions of people are going to see their healthcare bills skyrocket, and millions are going to probably go without healthcare. We have been warning my friends about this for months, and the Republicans have done nothing; not a damn thing. I don't know how they go home and face their constituents who are about to get screwed over with high healthcare premiums and bills and say: Oh, I know, I get it. People are going to lose their healthcare. My friends have been in charge all year, and they have done zero, nothing, not a damn thing.
So these bills that we are talking about today, I would encourage anybody who is viewing this on C-SPAN to google them and to look them up. It is pathetic. It is pathetic that this is what we are wasting our time doing. There is so much at stake. We have 2 weeks left to address the healthcare crisis, and my Republican friends have nothing, nothing that talks about that today.
The hotline already exists, by the way. You can google it. So you basically establish a hotline that already exists, Mr. Speaker. Boy, that is helping small businesses.
Yeah, but that is not a big problem, Mr. Speaker. The big problem is the high cost of healthcare and these tariffs which are just basically putting many of our businesses out of business.
So my friends come here and defend this garbage that we are doing. It is pathetic. It is pathetic.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Sykes).
Mr. Speaker, today I rise in opposition to the rule and H.R. 4312, the SCORE Act.
This legislation fails to address the rights of students to advocate for themselves, and that is why I introduced an amendment to allow for students to collectively bargain.
As a former gymnast and athlete, my allegiance will always be with athletes and with the underdog. It is undeniable that student athletes are not receiving equitable compensation for their labor, especially those in high-revenue sports. A student athlete constantly endangers themselves and risks great harm to their bodies for the entertainment of the masses, all while juggling classes, practice, and potentially a part-time job just to survive.
Their natural talents allow for universities to recruit on and off the field and raise money all while the actual revenue generators are left in the cold.
This issue was already addressed in the courts, and one thing that remains clear is the NCAA has been profiting off college students' labor and the students have not. For decades, students have not been paid for their participation in what is clearly a billion-dollar industry. This is not right.
Currently, the SCORE Act has not laid out an equitable revenue sharing model and leaves it wholly up to the interpretation of the school. Further, passing the SCORE Act as it stands would only eliminate students' ability to collectively bargain. That is why I introduced an amendment in the Rules Committee to strike the language from the bill and allow students to be properly compensated for their labor.
I thank my colleagues on the Democratic side for offering the amendment, but, unfortunately, the amendment failed on a party-line vote and was rejected by the Republicans.
Without my amendment, players at schools in my district, basketball players specifically, would not have the means of recourse to negotiate compensation and would be forced to simply shut up and dribble.
I understand that the needs of a Big 10 school are different from those in the MAC or the SWAC, and without the ability to collectively bargain, these athletes cannot negotiate with the university for their specific needs no matter the size of the program.
For those reasons and more, I am in opposition to the rule and the bill, and I encourage my colleagues to get back to the drawing board and do something that actually works for student athletes and allows them to be paid equitably and fairly and collectively bargain.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate that some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle may have been involved in small businesses. I was too, not just family, but I ran a small business for many, many years. People may not consider a solo practitioner of law a small business, but I tell you, Mr. Speaker, when you have to pay the light bill and you have to pay the salaries, you are a small business.
Further, I have also been involved for many years in a swimming pool that some years makes money but most years may show a little bit of a profit but it is there mainly because we want it to be a community pool. However, it is a corporation that makes money occasionally--even if only on paper--and that corporation has to buy equipment. Shockingly, Mr. Speaker, you need new kickboards. You need new diving boards, and you need new swim blocks.
What we did last summer helps all of those small businesses, and every one of them knows it. So to say that we haven't done anything on that is really a misnomer and a mistake.
I will tell you, Mr. Speaker, that it is true that the bill, the SCORE Act, does not solve all the ills that some may see out there, but it is a step in the right direction. That is why in my opening I said that this was a first step but not the last step in trying to solve problems that we have in our college athletics.
It is true that the big sports make lots of money, but the gymnasts of the world and the swimmers of the world don't bring in a lot of revenue. I can assure you, Mr. Speaker, that when I would be swimming in the pool, even in my prime, it was never considered mass appeal entertainment. Nobody would have paid to watch our swimming meets. Now, we had a good time swimming for Emory & Henry College, now University, but it was not bringing in great revenues to the college.
That is why this bill says that if you are going to be doing this, Mr. Speaker, then some of these revenues have to be spent to keep other sports going as well. We are trying to make sure that there is some recognition of the Olympic sports, and we are trying to make sure that there is recognition of other sports. That also means women's sports. Mr. Speaker, you have to have some abilities to take some of the money that you make off the revenue sports, as they are called, and use them for the other sports.
Now, if we want to continue with the Wild Wild West, as my friend, Gus Bilirakis, likes to say, then we do nothing and we defeat this rule. We do nothing, and it will continue to be a crazy arena out there where students aren't looked at, and particularly, Mr. Speaker, if you are not the top-billed students on the football team or on the basketball team. If you are a student athlete in any other way, then you are getting harmed by what is starting to happen and what is happening in our larger universities where everything is going to pay the top-named athletes who
Is it a perfect bill? I will not claim that. The rule makes it so that we get this first step moving down the pathway to try to resolve some of these issues.
I fully expect that we will have bills in the future that will deal with some of the other issues. We will find that when we do this, we probably have solved some problems, and we will discover additional problems. Sometimes when you get an answer to a question, it raises more questions. That is what this bill is supposed to do. It is supposed to start us down the path.
If we find that there are other issues that Congress needs to step in and deal with, then we can do so. We are not limited to taking action only in December 2025. That is why we have a legislative body that will consider if this bill does good.
I submit to you, Mr. Speaker, that the SCORE Act does good. Does it do perfectly? No. Does it solve everything that everybody might think of? No. Does it solve problems we have yet to think of? No.
It is a good start in an area where there is no guidance currently, where the NCAA has lost control of our college athletics completely, and where it is, in fact, a Wild Wild West where the vast majority of students, I submit, who are student athletes are being hurt and left behind.
We are trying to rectify it, to create a balance, so to speak. That is why, as a first step on this first-step bill, we need to pass the rule.
Mr. Speaker, the gentleman wants to talk about the rule, so let's talk about the rule.
What is frustrating to me, I think many of us--not just Democrats, but a good chunk of Republicans--are at the end of our rope. The Republican leadership is running this House like an authoritarian dictatorship. It is their way or the highway.
There are six bills that are allowed to be considered under this rule. Every single one of them is completely closed. What does that mean? It means nobody can offer amendments. Democrats can't offer amendments. Republicans can't offer amendments. They didn't even ask for people to submit amendments. They like to say nobody offered amendments. Yeah, people did offer amendments.
The gentleman talks about the SCORE Act. A Republican came to the Rules Committee last night and offered five amendments. I think they were reasonable. I think they were reasonable enough to be debated and for us to vote on them. All five were blocked. They are blocking members of their own party. That is how they run this place.
A Democrat came up with an alternative, a good idea. You may not support it, but people like me thought it was a better way to approach this than the way the bill is written. That was blocked, too.
Everything is blocked. Everything is blocked. I think they are being blocked because my friends are afraid they might prevail.
By the way, all the players associations are against the SCORE Act the way it is currently written, every single one of them.
This year alone, Republicans have issued 86 closed rules. That puts them on track to obliterate their previous record of the most closed rules in a single Congress. That is 86 times that this Chamber was kept from even considering amendments to approve bills. There is no debate, no votes, nothing. That is what an authoritarian dictatorship is like.
Republicans have blocked nearly 8 out of every 10 amendments submitted to the Rules Committee. Get this: That is 2,700 amendments gone, tossed out by this leadership. They have blocked 60 percent of bipartisan amendments, most of their own party's amendments, and more than 90 percent of Democratic amendments.
Apparently, the only ideas welcome in this Congress are the ones written by special interests or the ones that Donald Trump personally signs off on.
We used to debate in this Chamber. We used to vote on amendments on the floor. Members had a voice. Legislation wasn't cooked up in the Speaker's office and rammed through with no chance to fix it.
Here we are. Republicans have made fewer amendments in order at this point in the year than any Congress going back a decade.
By decimating debate, House Republicans have turned themselves into a rubberstamp for Trump. They will fast-track giveaways to the wealthy and the well-connected, but they will block amendments that would protect care for millions or unrig our economy for working people.
The real scandal here is that we can do something to control the rising costs of healthcare. We have been begging--by the way, not just Democrats; some Republicans have, too--for them to at least put something on the floor that we can debate and vote on to help alleviate the terrible burden that is about to fall on millions and millions of families in this country. The answer is we can't do it. They won't do it. They won't do it.
You want to debate the rule? This rule is pathetic. Six completely closed rules on six completely different bills. Congress is supposed to work for the American people. I think my Republican colleagues have forgotten that.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Stansbury).
Mr. Speaker, it is always instructive to come down here to the floor and listen to the debate. I think it speaks for itself.
I rise today in opposition to the bills that are before us and in strong defense of the Department of Education, our students, and kids across America.
As a public school student myself, I can say unequivocally that these bills are fundamentally unserious and designed to distract from the fact that the Trump administration is currently dismantling the Department of Education right before our very eyes.
They have laid off thousands of employees, shuttered offices, carved up programs and transferred them to other agencies, declassified educators from getting student loans, threatened schools and universities, and given their friends contracts to not only rewrite educational curricula but to even rewrite American history itself.
Let me remind my colleagues: This is the agency that was born out of the civil rights movement, the agency that ensures kids with disabilities have opportunities and ensures that all kids, no matter who they are or where they live, have access to education.
Before the Department of Education, millions of children all across this country were denied access to schools and educational opportunities. Federal programs were duplicative and wasteful, and States regularly violated the basic civil rights of students.
If our colleagues want to stand with students, want to stand with schools, and want to stand with educators, then we should be fighting to protect our schools, fighting to protect them from an administration that is trying to dismantle education as we speak. My colleagues should be fighting to address housing, food, and healthcare and to fix our broken economy.
That is why, Mr. Speaker, I am here today to stand to oppose these bills and to stand with every public school and every kid across America who is fighting for a fair shot. That is what we were elected to do.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Wow. I am going to talk about the rule. That is what I am supposed to talk about.
I will cede to my colleague, the ranking member of the Rules Committee, that it is absolutely a fair point of debate to bring up the number of closed rules, but he does so without providing all the context.
When accounting for closed rules in the rules package, CRAs and bills that received no amendments--this is for this Congress--less than 35 percent of closed rules have been at the discretion of the Rules Committee.
I know the ranking member will also say there was no formal deadline or call for amendments. Don't be misled, Mr. Speaker. He knows all too well that when he was chairman of the committee, the committee did not always provide a formal amendment deadline every week when they ran the show, either.
Mr. Speaker, it is true that this rule has six closed measures. It should be
My friend, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), may also recall that Members can submit amendments, and the Rules Committee may make them in order, whether there is a formal deadline to submit them or not. That is a practice that both Republicans and Democrats have employed.
Mr. Speaker, sometimes we get down here and we get all riled up. Been there, done that. I have been riled up myself before, but I find it fascinating from a historical context that my colleague said that when you have closed rules, this is what it looks like in an authoritarian dictatorship.
Mr. Speaker, I know that the words ``authoritarian dictatorship'' must poll well because my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are consistently throwing it out there. Here is what is so fascinating: In an authoritarian dictatorship, you don't get to claim that something that the majority is doing is like an authoritarian dictatorship because you would be banned from saying such things. You would not be allowed to say such things. You would not be allowed to have your time to debate the rule and then the bills. All of that would go by the wayside. That has not happened here.
Mr. Speaker, we can argue and, on some points, I might even agree with my colleague from Massachusetts. In the general running of the House floor, I might even be willing to go further than him on some issues because I would like to see us reform a lot of the things we do around here.
Mr. Speaker, we are nowhere near his so-called authoritarian dictatorship from a historical perspective. For those of us who study those movements throughout history, I would submit, Mr. Speaker, that to even say that is damaging to this great Republic, which is known throughout the world as the beacon of freedom and known as the United States of America.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, that is a lot of words to defend the most closed Congress in history. I say that this place is starting to look like an authoritarian dictatorship because this is what happens in authoritarian countries. People don't get an opportunity to be able to offer amendments or change bills or change legislation. It is take it or leave it.
Mr. Speaker, people are silenced all the time, and the gentleman is trying to defend this process. Talk to the Republican Member who came to the Rules Committee and offered five amendments--all of them germane, all of them designed to improve the so-called SCORE Act--and he was denied not one, not two, but all five. Can't do it.
Mr. Speaker, I will say again that when the gentleman says that, oh, people didn't offer amendments to all of these bills, I think people are getting to understand what is going on here. My Republican friends don't even ask for amendments anymore. They don't give people time to write them. Everybody kind of knows that the system is rigged. It is take it or leave it.
People have had it. Every single Member here has ideas that maybe could improve some of this legislation, but the whole system is rigged in a way that you have to take it or leave it. This is not the way the House of Representatives should be run. There are a whole bunch of other issues that we should be dealing with.
Mr. Speaker, on Friday, The Washington Post reported an egregious abuse of power by the Secretary of Defense. Back in September, an order was reportedly carried out to eliminate all remaining survivors on a suspected drug trafficking boat sailing through the Caribbean.
Pete Hegseth, who now calls himself Secretary of War, issued an order to kill everybody who survived the first strike. Kill everybody.
Those are the alleged words from the leader of our Defense Department. Just to be clear, killing defenseless people, regardless of whether they had been engaged in armed conflict, is a war crime, plain and simple. The administration is trying to brainwash the American people into thinking that cruelty and murder and war crimes are normal.
Mr. Speaker, I have news for the Trump administration. This is not normal. Even if we were at war, attacking survivors of an airstrike, whether or not they pose a threat to the United States, is a war crime. It is unconscionable. It is an unconscionable act of aggression that violates the Department of Defense's own guidelines, U.S. law, and international norms and laws.
Even President Trump is trying to distance himself from this unlawful attack, saying that he ``wouldn't have wanted that, not a second strike.''
Let me be clear. Secretary Hegseth has blatantly carried out illegal acts of violence and, right now, he is trying to convince the American people that these actions are okay. Mr. Speaker, the American people know better, and they deserve better.
Mr. Speaker, in case anybody tuned in to the President's little press conference before we gathered here today, he said that the issue of affordability is a ``hoax.'' It is a ``scam,'' he said.
Really? Anybody who is watching these proceedings, do you really think that the issue of affordability is a ``scam''? Prices are higher than ever. People will be paying more for their healthcare because of the inaction of the Republicans in the House, the Senate, and this White House. They will be paying so much that many of them are going to drop their health insurance.
Mr. Speaker, he said that the issue of affordability is a ``scam,'' a ``hoax,'' and is not real. I mean, come on. Come on. I would urge my Republican colleagues to stand up for their constituents. Do the right thing. Say ``no'' to these closed processes that don't allow you--even you--to be able to offer amendments, and stand up for policies that are going to make life easier for all people in this country.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to address their remarks to the Chair.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Massachusetts and I agree on one thing in his comments: Killing defenseless people is wrong.
I don't know whether that happened or not, but, as he knows or ought to know, Mr. Speaker, both the Senate and the Armed Services Committee in the House are looking into these allegations. Again, let me unequivocally state that I agree: Killing of defenseless people is wrong.
Let's talk about affordability. I do agree that the affordability of healthcare is an issue. It is a complex issue. It is not in any of the bills that we are dealing with today, and that is his complaint, it is that there ought to be something in there.
Mr. Speaker, let me remind folks how we got here. We got here with a bill that came out of the Speaker's office, Speaker Pelosi's office, called the Affordable Care Act, ObamaCare. It was going to make everybody's world much better.
Mr. Speaker, it did take care of preexisting conditions. I wasn't here then. It is something that Republicans should have fixed. They should have fixed that. Other than that, it did not make healthcare affordable.
In fact, the biggest complaint that my colleagues have had throughout the course of the last few weeks about the enhanced premium tax credits was due to a temporary program that they said would end December of 2025, and now they claim nobody can afford it without this temporary program that was brought in because of COVID. Nobody can afford insurance in the exchanges. They have, in fact, admitted that healthcare costs and health insurance costs in this country are a problem because of ObamaCare.
Mr. Speaker, we have talked about everything. I have thought about maybe getting up here and giving a speech on the National D-day Memorial. People are talking about everything that has nothing to do with this rule. I believe that I have exhausted all of my comments that are directly related to the rule, so I am prepared to close at the appropriate time. If we keep bringing up new issues, I may feel compelled to respond.
Mr. Speaker, if we are just talking about the rule that deals with these six bills that we are considering this week, then I am prepared to close.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I have to tell you, I love my Republican friends. They just reach back. Now, we are going back to Obama.
What they don't tell you is that Donald Trump has been in public life as President for 4 years, and he has been around for 10 years now. Yet, he has no responsibility for anything. It is always somebody else's fault. Donald Trump never had a plan to make healthcare more affordable or accessible. He didn't care about any of that stuff.
I just want to point out, for the record, because I think it is important, that one-half of adults with the Affordable Care Act healthcare coverage are small business owners, small business employees, or self-employed people. We are talking about millions and millions of Americans. Many of them are going to see their healthcare costs rise so high that they are not going to be able to afford it. They will lose their healthcare. Many of them will have to choose between healthcare and paying their rent or mortgages and basically putting food on the table.
The idea that that is not an urgent issue, that we are not addressing that, that it is kind of an afterthought, and, instead, we have a rule here that brings up a bill that creates a hotline that already exists, I mean, I would say to my Republican friends: Are you serious? Really, is this serious legislating?
Again, despite Republicans spending years attacking the Affordable Care Act, it has gotten only more popular. Support for the ACA consistently polls at or above 60 percent. In September 2025, in fact, 64 percent of the people viewed the ACA favorably.
Maybe support for it is so overwhelming because the ACA extended coverage to millions and millions of Americans, and its provisions help everyone, including people who were previously insured and many who were never insured.
Currently, the Affordable Care Act stops health insurance companies from charging sick people more on premiums than healthy people. It keeps those same health insurance companies from denying coverage to pregnant women, people with preexisting medical conditions, or because of the person's medical history. It prohibits the health insurance industry from setting an annual or lifetime limit. It demands that insurance companies cover most preventative services. It gives States the flexibility to expand their Medicaid programs, which 40 States have done. It provides financial assistance to working people to make healthcare coverage more affordable. It allows young adults to stay on their parents' insurance plans until they are 26.
These are just some of the provisions within the ACA that make it so popular with the American people. These are provisions that literally have saved people's lives and livelihoods.
In addition, the last time Democrats were in control, we built on the progress we made in the ACA. We allowed Medicare to negotiate prescription drug prices for the first time in history, saving both Medicare and the American people billions of dollars. We capped the cost of insulin at $35. We made signing up for healthcare coverage easier and more affordable. We lowered premiums by an average of $800 per person.
In over 4 years, nearly 12 million more Americans signed up for insurance in the ACA marketplace, bringing the total up to nearly 24 million in 2025.
Taken together, Democratic policies brought the uninsured rate to a record low.
Mr. Speaker, I don't know if we may have some other people coming in, so I will wait. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to provide the consolidation of H.R. 6074, which would extend the Affordable Care Act enhanced premium--
Mr. Speaker, I am going to hold on. I am going to reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, this is a terrible bill, and I urge everybody to vote ``no.'' Again, this is an important topic. This is about whether or not people basically have their basic rights upheld and respected in this country.
We are in the midst of a healthcare crisis, a crisis that Republicans are refusing to address, and more than 20 million Americans who get their healthcare on the ACA exchanges are going to see their premiums skyrocket in less than a month.
There are only 12 legislative days left for this House to fix this problem before disaster strikes millions of American families. What are the Republicans focused on? They are focused on nonexistent foreign influence in kindergarten classes. You can't make this up.
It is not for lack of an opportunity to do the right thing. Over and over, Democrats have offered the Republican majority in the House and the Senate a lifeline to vote to extend these credits and to get out of their own way. In fact, we have given them 19 separate chances to vote to extend the ACA credits. They have voted ``no'' on each and every one.
This PQ vote today will be congressional Republicans' 20th opportunity to vote to prevent the health insurance costs of millions of Americans, their constituents, my constituents, from rising significantly.
It is past time for them to do the right thing. For the sake of millions of Americans and their healthcare, I urge my Republican colleagues to support this extension and to vote on the previous question.
I ask unanimous consent, Mr. Speaker, to insert the text of my amendment into the Record, along with any extraneous material, immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Massachusetts?
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, make no mistake, this Republican majority is failing spectacularly, and the American people know it.
They have now had 12 months, a full year to do something, anything, to bring down prices, to lower costs, and to focus on housing, healthcare, food prices, or transportation. That is what I hear about when I talk to people back home. They want the government to focus on housing costs, healthcare, childcare, food, transportation. They want a Congress that makes it easier to buy a home, raise a family, and build a life. Instead, we get a bunch of absurd bills that nobody asked for.
Republicans want to bring up legislation addressing foreign influence in our kids' classrooms. How about they start addressing foreign influence in the Oval Office? How about Qatar gifting a new Air Force One to Trump? What was that in exchange for? How about the $20 billion Trump gave to his friend in Argentina? How about the lavish dinner he just held for the Saudi Prince who murdered a U.S. journalist?
No, no, no. Republicans don't want you to ask about that foreign interference. You need to worry about the Chinese Government getting involved with your kids' math class. That is what they say. Is this Republican majority for real? This is insane.
These guys have had a full year to do something for working families, to bring down food prices, to reduce healthcare costs for regular people, to take on corporate greed, and to lower everyday expenses. They have done nothing.
Instead, they have defended Trump's tariffs, passed tax cuts for billionaires, and protected the special interests while regular families are getting screwed. They have shoveled subsidies and giveaways to greedy CEOs while
Quite frankly, we don't share the same values. Democrats want a very different government. We want a government that stands up to corporate greed, a government that uplifts workers, powers consumers, and fights on the side of everyday people. We want a Congress that takes on special interests and doesn't reward them.
We believe in passing big, bold, consequential bills that make life better for everyday people, not creating hotlines that already exist and certainly not going on a taxpayer-funded vacation for 8 weeks like Republicans did in October and November.
The American people deserve so much better. They deserve leaders who fight for them, not a Republican majority that worships Donald Trump and rewards his wealthy friends.
I urge a ``no'' vote on this rule, Mr. Speaker. It is pathetic that we are here talking about this stuff and not talking about ways to keep the government open and to make sure that people can afford their healthcare and can afford other things.
There is too much attention being showered on those who are well-off and well-connected, those who are connected to this President, who give him gifts, and who write big checks to this administration. We have to put regular people first.
Mr. Speaker, I again urge a ``no'' vote on the rule, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to refrain from engaging in personalities toward the President.
Mr. Speaker, I am going to surprise you. I am actually going to talk about what we are supposed to talk about, and that would be the rule.
I am not going to talk about everything that is out there that I think ought to be changed in the world, and I am not going to say that if you don't do everything I want done that we shouldn't pass anything. If you vote this rule down, you are basically saying if you are not going to do what I want, you shouldn't do anything. I don't believe that is the way a legislative body ought to operate.
Mr. Speaker, I urge passage of this rule in order to bring more transparency and oversight into our children's schools, to ensure that our children are not being improperly influenced by foreign actors or that foreign actors aren't using contributions to our schools to benefit themselves.
One of our colleagues on the Education and Workforce Committee did a whole hearing on the Chinese Communist Party back in 2023, and part of what this bill is addressing are issues that were brought out at that time, one of which struck home.
Fairfax County's Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology, which at one time was the number one high school in the United States of America, has apparently slipped to number five. I did some checking before I came here today. They received over $3 million from Chinese entities. In return, the top-ranked high school in the United States gave them all the techniques that we are using to teach our students to be better scientists, to be better in the technology field, to be better in mathematics, and to be able to compete better with the United States. It doesn't make any sense.
That is why some of these bills are great bills that make sure that we are reining that in, that we know about it, that the parents know about it, that the government knows about it. We should know if we are getting foreign money influence in our schools, our students, or maybe stealing our ideas.
These bills help our small businesses. On top of that, we take the first step, as I said in the beginning and in the debate, not the last step to bring integrity into the name, image, and likeness, NIL, process in college sports by setting up a Federal framework--not possibly 50; we already have 30--but a Federal framework to ensure that we have fairness across the board on college athletics.
Mr. Speaker, I urge the passage of this rule so that we can bring about these good policies and we can debate all the other things that ail the world another day.
The material previously referred to by Mr. McGovern is as follows:
An Amendment to H. Res. 916 Offered by Mr. McGovern of Massachusetts
Providing for Consideration of H.R. 4312, Student Compensation and Opportunity Through Rights and Endorsements Act; Providing for Consideration of H.R. 1005, Combating the Lies of Authoritarians In...
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the unfinished business is the vote on ordering the previous question on the resolution (H. Res. 916) providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 4312) to protect the name, image, and likeness rights of student athletes and to promote fair competition with respect to intercollegiate athletics, and for other purposes; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 1005) to prohibit elementary and
The Clerk read the title of the resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous question.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 210, nays 205, not voting 17, as follows:
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 916, I call up the bill (H.R. 2965) to require the Administrator of the Small Business Administration to ensure that the small business regulatory budget for a small business concern in a fiscal year is not greater than zero, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 916, the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Small Business, printed in the bill, is adopted and the bill, as amended, is considered read.
The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill, as amended, shall be debatable for 1 hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Small Business or their respective designees.
The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Williams) and the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Williams).
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and submit extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Texas?
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 2965, the Small Business Regulatory Reduction Act of 2025, introduced by my friend, Beth Van Duyne, from the great State of Texas.
Throughout countless Democratic administrations, we have seen overregulation suffocate small businesses. The Biden-Harris administration alone imposed regulatory costs totaling $1.8 trillion on businesses in just 4 years.
The Committee on Small Business has heard testimony from hundreds of small business owners from across the country who repeatedly tell us that excessive regulation is stifling their operations and undermining their bottom line. To revitalize the American Dream, Big Government, one-size-fits-all mandates must stop.
The Trump administration fully recognizes this challenge and is taking aggressive acts to give small businesses the relief they deserve. In just the first 6 months of President Trump's second term, Republicans have worked to put an end to burdensome regulations through CRAs and carry out a deregulatory agenda.
We are responsible for $86 billion in reduced regulatory costs and over 50 million hours of reduced paperwork burdens. That is why I am proud to support this bill which would advance
This straightforward bill would require the SBA to operate under a regulatory budget of zero, meaning that for each new regulation imposed, a costly or outdated regulation must be repealed.
This bill would also require the SBA to provide annual reports on the true cost to small businesses imposed by government regulations. This seemingly simple requirement would have a major impact by bringing transparency to Federal regulatory actions each year and the true burden of those actions.
The transparency measures in this bill are critical to expose the harmful actions taken by bureaucrats behind closed doors and to highlight the harm done to hardworking small and family-owned businesses across the United States.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 2965, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 2965, the Small Business Regulatory Reduction Act.
Let me begin by stating that I wish we were here to talk about bills to help small businesses grow or policies that address challenges they are facing today, like tariffs and the cost of groceries and healthcare. Instead, we are talking about an unworkable regulatory budget.
To be clear, small businesses are not talking about regulations. It ranks near the bottom of their list. Inflation, tariffs, and finding good employees are some of the top challenges facing small businesses.
Take a walk down a Main Street, Mr. Speaker, and you will hear the same concern from small business owners up and down the block: The uncertainty and rising costs tied to the President Trump tariffs are crushing their small businesses, plain and simple.
We should be working together on issues that matter: lowering costs for small businesses. Instead, we are considering two regulatory bills that will not help them one iota, while real problems go unaddressed.
H.R. 2965 may sound good on the surface, but it will have the practical effect of limiting the SBA from issuing any rules, even if the benefits outweigh the costs.
The SBA needs to issue regulations to update programs, issue disaster regulations, and even reduce recordkeeping requirements. That is good government practice.
The majority fails to realize that agencies may be able to estimate the cost of a regulation, but they do not have the hard data on the costs that are imposed.
This bill will require the SBA to make assumptions that could turn out to be incorrect. There is nothing in the bill that clarifies how the agency is to implement a regulatory budget, and it is therefore impractical.
Finally, the bill does not include an exception for national emergencies, meaning that if this bill had been enacted before the pandemic, small businesses across the country might not have received PPP assistance in a timely manner, if they received it at all.
For these reasons, I oppose the Small Business Regulatory Reduction Act, and I urge my colleagues to oppose it.
Mr. Speaker, every day, small business owners serve as their own accountants, legal counsel, and managers while still handling the day-to-day operations of their enterprises. That means they work extra hours or they hire extra assistance just to keep up with and bear the costly burden of complying with local, State, and federal regulations.
To say that we are not going to save money and we are not going to help small businesses save money by cutting resolutions is an absolute lie.
Working hard has always been the standard for small business owners, but when the Biden-Harris administration created $1.8 trillion in additional regulatory costs for businesses across the country in just 4 years, small business owners felt the brunt of that pain.
H.R. 2965, the Small Business Regulatory Reduction Act of 2025, supports the Trump administration's deregulatory agenda by giving small businesses the relief they need to grow and succeed, no matter what industry they are in.
Put simply, this bill aims to ensure that any new rulemaking by the Small Business Administration is at no cost to small businesses--not $1.8 trillion, but no cost. The very agency that helps small businesses start, grow, and build cannot also be the one that increases their financial and regulatory burden.
In addition, H.R. 2965 requires the SBA Office of Advocacy to report to Congress on the total cost of all Federal regulations impacting small businesses. Unlike what we just heard from the other side of the aisle, to be clear, this bill does not prevent agencies from issuing new regulations, but rather, it requires them to eliminate those that are duplicative, outdated, or don't reflect the intent of the law.
The PPP was a program that was established by Congress. It was not a regulation established by the SBA. That is totally irrelevant.
In doing so, it creates a systemic culture of regulatory discipline where agencies will have to consistently review regulations with scrutiny.
Small businesses make up 99.9 percent of businesses in America, and they remain the key source of economic prosperity across all of our districts.
H.R. 2965 moves the needle toward empowering small businesses by reducing red tape. To say that that doesn't save money to small business, then obviously she has never been a small business owner.
If we want America to succeed, it starts on Main Street. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the Small Business Regulatory Reduction Act of 2025.
Mr. Speaker, I thank our chair for his leadership and the ranking member for her leadership, as well.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 2965, the Small Business Regulatory Reduction Act of 2025.
For 4 long years under the previous administration, America's small businesses, the backbone of our economy and the heart of Missouri's Fourth Congressional District, have been smothered by an onslaught of overreaching Federal regulations that have made goods less affordable in the United States of America.
Under the Biden-Harris administration, small businesses were hit with an unprecedented $1.8 trillion--not billion--$1.8 trillion in new regulatory costs while inflation soared over 20 percent.
Where do you think that cost goes, Mr. Speaker? It goes to the consumer. Main Street cannot thrive under that kind of bureaucratic chokehold. Americans are demanding affordability, and this is a good step in that direction.
This bill, championed by my colleague Congresswoman Beth Van Duyne, finally puts a stop to it. H.R. 2965 requires the Small Business Administration to report on the regulatory costs imposed by other Federal agencies on small businesses.
It is transparency. It is all about transparency. It is going to show the American people exactly where the Democrat blue tape is strangling growth in America.
This legislation supports President Trump's regulatory rightsizing agenda and gives our job creators the relief they desperately need to start, to grow, and to succeed once again.
Mr. Speaker, do you want to make things more affordable in America? Do you want to cut down on overregulation? This is the bill to do it. Let's all stand with America and our small businesses and our entrepreneurs, our family-owned businesses, and support H.R. 2965.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman and the ranking member for this debate on the floor today.
I rise in strong support of H.R. 2965, the Small Business Regulatory Reduction Act of 2025.
I certainly join those remarks of my colleagues on this side who have advocated for the bill. I would like to back up a bit and talk more generally about regulatory burden and how this bill is an important step in dealing with a much larger problem.
The chart on my right shows the number of pages in the Federal Register. The year I was born, 1968, there were about 50,000 pages. Today there are almost 200,000 pages. In my lifetime, the number of rules and regulations written by unelected Federal bureaucrats, the people in the real world that we all represent--in my case in eastern Kansas--must comply with, has quadrupled.
I will guarantee you, Mr. Speaker, that is a silent tax increase on every American and every small business in all of our States.
The estimated regulatory compliance cost for businesses in the United States is about $3 trillion per year. As has been mentioned, about $1.8 trillion of that was added in just the 4 years of the prior administration. To put that in context, the entire Federal budget is about $7 trillion per year.
Do you know what the difference is between a tax and a regulatory command, Mr. Speaker? With a tax, the Federal Government says to, in this case, a small business owner: Give me your money, and we will spend it on priorities that we decide. With a regulation, the Federal Government says to that same small business owner: You take your money and spend it on the priorities that we decide. Not on hiring more people, not on growing and expanding, not on giving charitable support in our communities, not on doing all of the things that small businesses do, but as people in this town have decided. That is what is at stake here. That is why we have to take this action.
Mr. Speaker, I urge passage of this measure because it is one step toward peaking that mountain of regulation, making small businesses freer to do what they do, making life more affordable to all the people I represent who buy and sell on Main Street each and every day.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I will close with this: Trump's tariffs, not regulations, are crushing small businesses. I know that it is painful for the other side of the aisle to discuss or even debate the issue of tariffs and how it is negatively impacting small businesses. The President of the United States said that on day one he will lower the costs. Yet, here we are.
Witnesses have testified before our committee that the costs of tariffs are harming their small businesses. The uncertainty resulting from the on-again, off-again pronouncements by Trump has halted investment and expansion of small businesses, and it has hindered basic business decisions, like when to put in an order or how to plan for the holiday season.
I know they don't want to talk about tariffs and, instead, we are debating these two bills.
The American Action Forum estimates that Trump's tariffs are costing small businesses $85 billion a year, and that is not including the cost of navigating the uncertain environment or complying with the tariffs themselves.
The tariffs disproportionately harm small firms, which operate on thinner margins and have virtually no buying power. Yet, we are focused today on a regulatory budget that is unworkable.
The bill has no exceptions for national emergencies. Let's look back to 2020. SBA issued scores of rules to provide relief to help small businesses during the pandemic, so the author of the bill is incorrect when she claimed that SBA didn't issue regulations to make sure that people accessing the money from PPP will not commit crime, abuse, or fraud.
The Paycheck Protection Program imposed significant compliance burdens on small businesses, but I believe we can all attest to the fact that the PPP helped millions of small businesses stay afloat that otherwise would have gone out of business. Clearly, the benefits of those regulations at the time outweighed the costs.
Had a regulatory budget been in place in 2020, it would have been extremely challenging for SBA to cut existing regulatory programs to offset the cost of the Paycheck Protection Program. Moreover, many of the lending rules ensure accountability and fair access. Cutting them to free up funds for PPP would have compromised the integrity of the program.
Moreover, these funds needed to be disbursed quickly. Imposing a no- new-spending-without-cuts approach would have delayed or reduced aid to small businesses.
The bottom line is that this bill is slogan over substance and would harm small businesses rather than help them, particularly in a crisis.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2965 will make sure that the cost of new SBA rulemakings is at zero to ensure that only necessary regulations are in place. We must support Main Street, starting with our work here in D.C.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 916, the previous question is ordered on the bill, as amended.
The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was read the third time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on passage of the bill.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 916, I call up the bill (H.R. 4305) to direct the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration to establish a Red Tape Hotline to receive notifications of burdensome agency rules, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 916, the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Small Business, printed in the bill, is adopted and the bill, as amended, is considered read.
The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill, as amended, shall be debatable for 1 hour equally controlled by the chair and the ranking minority member of the Committee on Small Business or their respective designees.
The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Williams) and the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Williams).
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Texas?
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 4305, the DUMP Red Tape Act, introduced by Representative Wied from the great State of Wisconsin.
Mr. Speaker, entrepreneurs across America are driving our economic growth, but too often they are forced to fight through layers of red tape just to keep their doors open. Every day, small businesses deal with outdated, duplicative, or unclear regulations that make it harder for them to hire, grow, and innovate.
Since 1976, the SBA Office of Advocacy has served as a voice for small businesses across the country. The Office of Advocacy works to encourage small business success through the government's legislative, regulatory, and administrative process. When it comes to regulatory costs, Office of Advocacy is equipped to represent the interests of small businesses at the Federal level.
To make this easier, Office of Advocacy launched the Red Tape Hotline, a necessary resource that gives small businesses a direct, real-time way to report burdensome regulations that are holding them back.
The Red Tape Hotline empowers small business owners to speak up and help Office of Advocacy hold Federal agencies accountable for the red tape that is crushing their day-to-day operations.
The Red Tape Hotline was created by following President Trump's executive order, ``Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation.'' The DUMP Red Tape Act codifies the executive order and ensures that small businesses always have a reliable channel to be heard.
This bill strengthens Office of Advocacy's ability to deliver small business concerns directly to Congress, ensuring that we have the real- world data which we need to push for smarter, more effective regulatory policies.
While the public can submit comments to proposed rules, this Red Tape Hotline provides small businesses the opportunity to provide feedback on the true burden of compliance with active regulations.
This bill also requires Office of Advocacy to submit an annual report to Congress summarizing the notifications received through the hotline. By strengthening and formalizing this process, Congress will receive a clear picture of how Federal regulations affect different types of businesses nationwide. This will help ensure that Congress is acting on accurate, real-world information.
Some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle may argue that the hotline improperly focuses on burdensome regulations rather than collecting positive feedback, but it is simple: The purposes of this tool is to identify obstacles that need attention, and regulations that function well do not require intervention.
Small businesses are not asking us to preserve the status quo. They are asking to eliminate the barriers that prevent them from thriving. By isolating problematic rules, we empower Congress and Federal agencies to focus time and resources where they are needed most, while still preserving the regulations that work.
The DUMP Red Tape Act strengthens our commitment to a pro-job, pro- innovation economy by ensuring that Federal agencies remain accountable and responsive to the needs of Main Street.
Mr. Speaker, with that in mind, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 4305, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 4305, the Destroying Unnecessary, Misaligned, and Prohibitive Red Tape Act, or the DUMP Red Tape Act. While H.R. 4305 is less objectionable than the other anti- regulatory bills, it is simply not necessary.
To begin with, a deregulatory hotline already exists on regulations.gov. Establishing another creates duplication and drains SBA resources. Isn't this contrary to everything Republicans, the administration, and the recently dissolved DOGE effort tried to prevent, duplicity?
More concerning, the proposal hasn't been vetted properly. In the first 100-day report, the Office of Advocacy indicated there were 96 small business submissions and, more recently, reported there were 301 submissions. Yet, despite repeated requests for more information, the Office of Advocacy has failed to provide any specific information about this request to the committee--Democrats and Republicans.
We have no way of knowing if the submissions are related to rules. They could have easily been about tariffs or unpaid invoices to contractors.
To the best of my knowledge, the Office of Advocacy has not weighed in with the administration, which raises concern over its lack of independence from the administration.
Turning to the specifics, the bill lacks adequate reporting mechanisms to identify who is making the submissions, leaving it vulnerable to abuse and unable to differentiate between a small business, trade organization, or law firm. The bill focuses on the costs of regulations, not the benefits, which greatly outweigh the costs.
For these reasons, I oppose the bill. It is important to note that I said to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle that if we can get information from the Office of Advocacy as to what small businesses are actually submitting and the mechanics of the hotline to ensure independence, I would be willing to work with them. Instead, the bill is being rammed through the House to score political points.
I urge my colleagues to oppose the bill and focus on real solutions to lift up small businesses during these troubling economic times.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of my bill, H.R. 4305, the Destroying Unnecessary, Misaligned, and Prohibitive Red Tape Act, also known as the DUMP Red Tape Act.
For too long, America's small businesses have been buried under costly regulations. After suffering through 4 years of regulatory onslaught by the Biden administration, totaling nearly $1.8 trillion in new costs and requiring an additional 360 million hours to comply with these new regulations, small businesses are desperate for regulatory relief.
A report published last December by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce found that over half of small business owners view the cost of complying with regulations as a barrier to growth.
Small businesses are forced to navigate complex environmental reporting requirements, overtime and wage rules that change from one administration to the next, and lengthy permitting processes that can delay construction projects for months or even years.
Family-owned shops face costly data privacy mandates designed for multinational corporations, while contractors struggle with ever- shifting OSHA paperwork requirements that eat up their time better spent on the jobsite.
Earlier this year, the Small Business Administration created the Red Tape Hotline under its Office of Advocacy. This hotline gives small businesses a seat at the table to highlight the prohibitive red tape regulations from across Federal agencies that hurt their ability to grow and compete.
My bill takes that progress further. It codifies the hotline into law and requires annual reports to Congress so that we know exactly which rules are holding back growth and what steps are being taken to fix them.
I am pleased that my bill earned the endorsement of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and Associated Builders and Contractors, which recognized the need for a direct line of communication to the SBA for small businesses.
The DUMP Red Tape Act is a commonsense way to gather input directly from the people most harmed by overregulation to allow Congress to take meaningful action.
Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support this important piece of legislation and stand with America's small businesses.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this bill. Codifying the so-called Red Tape Hotline, an anonymous inbox, the contents of which, as the ranking member articulated, we know virtually nothing about, will do nothing to help small businesses.
While the majority is busy claiming to fight bureaucracy by creating new bureaucracy, they are ignoring the real crisis small businesses are begging us to address: the looming lapse of the enhanced premium tax credits.
I know this because I have met with small business owners in my district, like Rachel Rozner, who is the owner of the Elden Tea Shop in Reston, not far from here, a five-person business that is exactly the kind of Main Street business that the majority claims to champion.
As she told me, Rachel's business depends on the tax credits. Her tea shop is not an exception. It is the norm. Nearly half of all adults with ACA marketplace coverage are small business owners, small business employees, or self-employed. In many cases, the Affordable Care Act and the enhanced premium tax credits have given them the freedom to start their small business, but the Republican attacks on healthcare will force small businesses to close.
Nationally, 22 million Americans, including millions of small business owners, will see premium hikes averaging 114 percent. Some of their premiums will double, triple, or even quadruple. These are middle-class workers. These are employees of small businesses. These are small business owners, the people keeping our local economies alive.
Republicans keep telling us they are the party of entrepreneurs, but you can't be the party of entrepreneurs while you are driving up their healthcare costs and driving them out of business.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the DUMP Red Tape Act and thank Representative Wied for his leadership on this crucial deregulatory initiative.
In addition to regulations that are promulgated pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act, there exists a vast scope of additional regulatory documents that impact small businesses. These are guidance documents, memoranda, bulletins, circulars, letters, and more, which Wayne Crews, a fellow in regulatory studies at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, has more properly referred to as regulatory dark matter.
Only rules that are adopted pursuant to the APA actually carry the force of law. Yet, in practice, agencies seek to skew the intent of congressional law and impose other requirements through this regulatory dark matter, thereby avoiding compliance with the APA requirements.
Identifying the full scope of the regulatory state as it exists through this dark matter is not only a challenge for Congress and the agencies themselves but for our small businesses, as well.
Under the first Trump administration, agencies cataloged or attempted to catalog all of these various guidance documents, but as soon as he took office, President Biden stripped away this essential transparency measure in the early days.
The reality is that reforming the regulatory state begins with identifying its true magnitude, and that is an exercise which Congress simply cannot do alone.
The deregulatory agenda President Trump instituted, which resulted in the creation of the SBA Office of Advocacy's Red Tape Hotline, captures this reality.
It does so by creating a forum by which to partner with the small businesses of America, who can identify sector-specific regulations that impose undue regulatory compliance challenges and costs.
By voting for the DUMP Red Tape Act, we can codify this hotline and the essential role that it plays and make permanent this partnership with America's small businesses in a much-needed deregulatory effort.
Federal regulation's total compliance costs and economic effects are at least $2.155 trillion, which equates to over $16,000 in annual hidden regulatory costs to the American taxpayer. If we truly care about affordability, about the economy, about small businesses and their consumers, then there is no better policy than deregulation, and this bill will further empower the SBA Office of Advocacy in coordination with the small businesses that it represents.
Mr. Speaker, I thank again Representative Wied and Chairman Williams for their leadership on this important issue, and I urge my colleagues to vote in favor.
Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to rise in support today of H.R. 4305, the DUMP Red Tape Act.
I am back again on this subject with this chart that shows the growth and the number of pages in the Federal Register where all of the Federal regulations are published. It is where they are codified. That is where you go to look them up, and the number of pages has quadrupled in my lifetime.
Let me just offer a couple of thoughts on how this bill is, in my view, important for small businesses to get at that problem of the creeping weight of Federal overregulation.
In my district, the Second District of Kansas, the eastern part of the State, it is, more or less, 80 percent of the small businesses in the State employ 20 or fewer people. Eighty percent of them are really small businesses. There are about 93 percent if you go under 500 employees. For a lot of us that sounds like a big number, in my part of the world, but under 20 employees, that is a small business. Those are the Main Street businesses we are talking about.
I talk with a lot of people that own those businesses, that work in those businesses. They are all active in their communities. They support everything from the local sports team to the local charity to the local school's foundation. That is what they are focused on: making a living, making their business work, whatever it is they do: providing professional services, other services, retail items, manufacturing items. That is what they are focused on.
They are not focused on this. They don't have an army of compliance attorneys and compliance consultants to help them figure out what is in these 200,000 pages of Federal regulation and what that means for how they conduct their behavior in their communities each and every day.
Mr. Speaker, how do we figure out where to start? I think this bill is a very commonsense answer: Ask the people who are most affected. The whole point of the red tape hotline that President Trump set up and that this bill codifies and makes permanent is to allow the people in the small business world who are affected by regulatory decisions made in this town, our Nation's Capital, to tell somebody who has the ability to aggregate that information and do something about it. Let's bring it to the attention of lawmakers that this is where you need to focus. This one, of all of these, is what is making a difference in preventing me from adding more employees or having a little more liquidity so that I can maybe redo the storefront on Main Street. Maybe I can give a little more to the local charitable cause or maybe my family will just be a little bit more comfortable going into the holidays.
Mr. Speaker, ask the people affected and listen to their voices. That is what this bill does. It makes sure we put in place a simple structure that is permanent so that the vagaries of this town don't change things on Main Street.
Mr. Speaker, I strongly support this measure. It is just common sense.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, small businesses are being crushed by the Trump tariffs, and the SBA Office of Advocacy, to the best of my knowledge, has not conveyed their concerns to the White House.
The Office of Advocacy is supposed to be an independent office within the SBA, and it is responsible for advancing the views and concerns of small businesses before Congress, the White House, Federal agencies, the Federal courts, and State and local policymakers, but it has done nothing on tariffs. That is particularly troubling to me and should be equally troubling to my friends on the other side of the aisle.
Instead of helping small businesses that are being crushed by the Trump tariffs, the majority is focused on creating another deregulatory hotline, even though one already exists on regulations.gov. This bill to codify a hotline at the SBA Office of Advocacy is duplicative, unnecessary, and a waste of taxpayers' dollars.
The system is clearly broken. For years, the chairman and ranking member of the Small Business Committee have had a strong tradition of working together to find common ground. That cooperation was essential in helping entrepreneurs launch and grow their small businesses. It is exactly what we are losing now.
We are wasting valuable time today on bills that are unnecessary, divisive, and a waste of taxpayers' dollars.
Unfortunately, my Republican colleagues are focused on regulatory bills that will not help small businesses one iota, while allowing the authorization for critical, vital counseling and training programs to lapse. It doesn't make sense. Small businesses deserve better than slogans over substance.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, despite what my colleagues say, there is no hotline that exists exclusively for small businesses. H.R. 4305 will fix that problem. It will provide an avenue for small businesses to engage with the SBA Office of Advocacy, a voice that is focused on advocating for Main Street.
This bill passed out of the committee on a bipartisan basis, and as chairman, I am committed to getting our Members the information they need to support Main Street.
Ultimately, this information will come as an annual report to Congress upon enactment, but for now, we will continue to work with the Office of Advocacy to understand concerns from small businesses across the country.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 916, the previous question is ordered on the bill, as amended.
The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was read the third time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on passage of the bill.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today with deep concern at the President's outrageous and shameful pardon of Juan Orlando Hernandez, a man an American jury convicted of trafficking tons of cocaine into the United States and of corrupting his own government in the process.
I saw this firsthand when I brought a bipartisan delegation to Honduras when he was President. We refused to meet with him because he is/was a thug.
This is not a minor case. This is not a close call. This was a decisive conviction for crimes that have devastated American families and fueled violence and instability abroad. Yet, President Trump chose to use one of the most powerful powers of the Presidency to wipe it all out.
This is so hypocritical as he is bombing small boats that he describes as full of drugs coming to the United States. Perhaps they are, and that is a different thing. However, if he is doing that, why would he pardon a thug?
Hernandez once boasted at a meeting of narcotraffickers that ``together they were going to shove the drugs right up the noses of the gringos.'' What message does pardoning this criminal send to parents who have lost children to narcotics, to law enforcement officers risking everything to stop the flow of deadly drugs?
This disgraceful pardon should be met with bipartisan condemnation as an affront to our values, our safety, our rule of law, and our democracy.
Those who do not join in that condemnation are either pro-crime or do not care. It is another reminder the American people must be vigilant.
Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.
The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 3 o'clock and 51 minutes p.m.), under its previous order, the House adjourned until tomorrow, Wednesday, December 3, 2025, at 10 a.m. for morning-hour debate.
